1939 Bandera Rd, San Antonio, TX 78228 · Bexar County · (210) 434-0671
134 certified beds, about 83 residents a day · For profit - Individual · Medicare and Medicaid since 1993
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675138 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 4, 2026, inspectors cited 11 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
None of its 30 health citations since January 2024 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.21 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.26 of those hours.
41.4% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Paramount Healthcare, an affiliated group of 8 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 30 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible; and each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #41) reviewed for accident hazards and supervision. The facility failed to ensure Resident #41's floor mat was in place. This failure could place residents at risk for falls with the possibility of injury.
Inspectors wroteNumber of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administration of all drugs and biologicals) for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #32) to meet the needs of the resident, in that: The facility failed to discontinue Resident #32's order for Zyprexa 10mg when order was changed to 5mg daily resulting in resident #32 receiving the wrong dose x11 days. This failure could place residents at risk of injury by not receiving medications as ordered by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that its medication error rates are not 5 percent (%) or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 32% based on 8 out of 25 opportunities which involved two (2) of five (5) residents (Resident #2 and Resident #3), and one (1) of three (3) staff (MA A) observed for medication administration errors. 1. MA A administered medications to Resident #2 on 06/02/2026 at 10:30 a.m., 30 minutes after the scheduled administration window of 08:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. 2. MA A administered medications to Resident #3 on 06/02/2026 at 10:40 a.m., 40 minutes after the scheduled administration window of 08:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving therapeutic effects from the medications and possibly experiencing adverse reactions. 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food storage, preparation, and distribution. The facility failed to ensure food in refrigerators and freezers were labeled or dated and canned foods were not dented and damaged. This failure could place residents at risk for health complications, foodborne illnesses, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to voice grievances to the facility or other agency or entity that hears grievances without discrimination or reprisal and without fear of discrimination or reprisal. Such grievances include those with respect to care and treatment which has been furnished as well as that which had not been furnished, the behavior of staff and of other residents, and other concerns regarding their LTC facility stay for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #30) reviewed for grievances. The facility failed to generate a grievance report for Resident #30's RP's grievance made on 05/14/2026 when Resident #30's RP complained that she continues to be denied access to Resident #30's medical records. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source are reported immediately but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, including to the State Survey Agency in accordance with State law through established procedures, for 1 of 8 Residents (Resident #30) reviewed for reporting. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident to meet the resident's psychosocial needs for 3 of 8 residents (Residents #26, Resident #27, and Resident #34) reviewed for comprehensive care planning. The facility failed to ensure residents' preferences for activities and leisure were addressed in the comprehensive care plans for Resident #26 and Resident #34. The facility failed to ensure residents' preferences for device to treat a medical symptom was no longer necessary and was addressed in the comprehensive care plan for Resident #27. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities, both facility-sponsored group and individual activities and independent activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 2 of 8 residents (Residents #26 and Resident #34) reviewed for activities. The facility failed to ensure Resident #26 and Resident #34 were provided individual and independent activities to meet the residents' psychosocial needs and preferences during February 2026 - June 2026. This failure could result in decreased psychosocial well-being or decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident who was incontinent of bowel/bladder and each resident with an indwelling catheter received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections, for 2 (Resident #7 and Resident #34) of 2 residents reviewed for incontinent care and indwelling urinary catheters. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's indwelling urinary catheter tubing was secured during personal care to prevent dislodgement and injury. 2. The facility failed to ensure while providing incontinent care, CNA J and CNA G cleaned the inner thigh areas and the right buttock area for Resident #34. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #34) reviewed for enteral feeding (method to provide nutrition and fluids directly into digestive tract via a feeding tube). CNA G and CNA J failed to contact nurse to stop Resident #34's tube feeding infusion prior to laying the head of the bed flat and providing incontinence care. This deficient practice could place residents who receive enteral nutrition at increased risk for experiencing nausea and vomiting, choking, aspiration, infection, and abdominal discomfort.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences in 1 (Resident #7) of 2 residents reviewed receiving supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #7's oxygen tubing was handled properly to prevent contamination. Resident 7's nasal cannula was on the floor in her room and CNA C placed it back on resident. This failure could put residents receiving supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula at risk for cross-contamination and respiratory infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infections for 1 of 4 resident (Residents #1) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure CNA A washed her hands before donning gloves and failed to change soiled gloves prior to touching clean brief and linens during an incontinent care observation for Resident #1 on 03/04/2026. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of cross contamination and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans: The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's comprehensive care plan was completed in a timely manner and included behaviors she had refusing care or being combative during care. This deficient practice could cause confusion for staff members responsible for providing direct care to the residents and place residents at risk of receiving improper care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for food service safety. 1. The facility failed to maintain the cleanliness of the facility ice maker. 2. Two open food items were observed in the medication storage fridge, undated and unlabeled. 3. Three open and unrefrigerated containers of fluid drinks intended for residents were observed on two medication carts. This failure could place residents who receive food and/or snacks from the facility at risk for food borne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 5 (Residents #8, #15, #31, #62, and #77) of 18 residents reviewed for care plans. 1. The facility failed to develop care plan interventions for Resident #77's hospice services. 2. The facility failed to develop care planning related to Resident #15's ordered Wanderguard device and known tendencies to wander the facility in attempts to elope. The care planning for this resident also did not include monitoring for the resident's ordered, psychotropic medications. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 3 of 8 residents (Resident #9, #28, and #40) reviewed for personal hygiene. 1. The facility failed to provide Resident #9, 8 of 13 scheduled showers between 03/04/2025 and 04/03/2025. 2. The facility failed to provide Resident #28, 8 of 13 scheduled showers between 03/04/2025 and 04/03/2025. 3. The facility failed to provide Resident #40, 4 of 14 scheduled showers between 03/04/2025 and 04/03/2025. This failure could place residents who require assistance from staff for personal hygiene at risk of not receiving care and services contributing to overall poor hygiene, risk of experiencing a diminished quality of life, and possible skin infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and records review, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible and each resident receives adequate assistance devices to prevent accidents for 3 of 3 resident halls reviewed for infection control and 1 resident (Resident #64) of 3 residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. 1. The facility failed to store hand sanitizer in a way that prevented residents to access the hazardous substance without supervision. 2. The facility failed to ensure that fall mats were in place for Resident #64. These failures could place resident at risk for injuries due to not having adequate supervision or devices. 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to revise the comprehensive care plan after each assessment for 1 (Resident #64) out of 8 residents reviewed for care planning. The facility failed to revise the care plan after investigating a fall sustained by Resident #64. The facility investigation included planned interventions that were not included care plan revision. This failure could result in the resident not receiving planned care or additional falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation , interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive proper treatment to maintain vision abilities and assist the resident in making appointments for 1 (Resident #18) of 6 residents reviewed for communication and sensory problems. The facility failed to reschedule an ophthalmology appointment for Resident #18 to evaluate and treat the resident's medical condition affecting her eyesight. This failure could lead to diminished or loss of vision and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with limited range of motion received appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or prevent further decrease in range of motion for two of two (Resident #8 & Resident #31) residents reviewed for range of motion. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's left palm protector (medical device used to treat hand contractures, permanent tightening of the muscles, tendons, skin and surrounding tissues that causes stiffness, placed in the hands to help improve range of motion) was in place to her left hand. The facility failed to identify a medical device for Resident #31's right hand to help improve range of motion. The failures could place residents at increased risk for decrease in mobility and range of motion and contribute to worsening of contractures.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the medication error rate was not five percent or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 8.11% based on 3 errors out of 37 opportunities, which involved two residents (Resident #22 and Resident #3) of four reviewed for medication administration. 1. CMA B administered Fingolimod HCl oral capsule 0.5mg 1 capsule for personality disorder to Resident #2 at 09:34 AM that was ordered for administration at 08:00 AM. CMA B administered Sertraline HCl oral tablet 25mg 1 tablet for anxiety to Resident #22 at 09:34 AM that was ordered for administration at 08:00 AM. 2. CMA B documented administration of medication Cholecalciferol Tablet 1000 units 1 tab for vitamin deficiency during medication administration at 09:49 AM. However, this medication was not observed as administered at this time . [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of any significant medication errors for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for medication administration. The facility provided Resident #24 with the medication Carvedilol outside of physician parameters. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving the therapeutic effects of their prescribed medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanity, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 (Resident #69) of 4 residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility also failed to handle and transport linens so as to prevent the spread of infections for infection control practices in 1 of 3 resident hallways observed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA A removed soiled gloves prior to exiting a room, as well as securing soiled linen in a bagged or contained method at the point of collection prior to transporting. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents maintained the right to receive visitors of his or her choosing at the time of his or her choosing for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure all residents had the right to receive visitors between 8:00 PM and 8:00 AM. This failure placed residents at risk of isolation, decreased emotional well-being, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 8 residents (Residents #17) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to care plan Resident #17's use of Clopidogrel 75 mg (blood thinner). This failures could have placed residents at risk of not having their needs met. Record review of Resident #17's face sheet dated 2/21/2024 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnosis that included: Alzheimer's disease (is a brain disorder that slowly destroys memory and thinking skills). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents are free of any significant medication errors for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #63) reviewed for medication administration, in that: The facility failed to prevent Resident #63 from being provided Midodrine, a medication designed to raise a person's blood pressure, while Resident #63 was assessed with blood pressure higher than the physician recommended parameters for providing the medication. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving therapeutic effects of their medications and possible adverse reactions.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide or obtain laboratory services, to meet the needs of its residents for 2 of 12 residents (Resident #32 and #60) reviewed for laboratory services, in that: 1.) The facility failed to obtain the ordered labs for Resident #32 on 11/23/2023 in a timely manner. 2.) The facility failed to obtain the ordered lab for Resident #60 on 11/22/2023 in a timely manner. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving timely diagnosis and treatment, and not receiving appropriate monitoring for health and well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide or obtain laboratory services ordered by physician assistant, nurse practitioner or clinical nurse specialist in accordance with state law, including scope of practice laws, to meet the needs of its residents for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #32) reviewed for laboratory services, in that: The facility failed to report laboratory results received on 12/08/2023 for Resident #32 in a timely manner to the physician. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving timely diagnosis and treatment, and not receiving appropriate monitoring for health and well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for accuracy of medical records in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident # 17's medication, Clopidogrel 75 mg, was correctly listed on Face sheet , for use for hypertension instead of a blood thinner. This deficient practice could affect residents whose records are maintained by the facility and could place them at risk for errors in care and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure an encoded, accurate and complete discharge MDS was electronically completed and transmitted to the CMS System within 14 days after completion for 4 of 4 residents (Resident #1, #2, #3, and #4) reviewed for discharge MDS assessments. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's discharge MDS was completed and transmitted. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's discharge MDS was completed and transmitted. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's discharge MDS was completed and transmitted. 4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's discharge MDS was completed and transmitted. These deficient practices placed residents at risk of not having assessments completed and submitted in a timely manner as required.
12 fire safety citations on file: 7 on June 4, 2026, 3 on April 4, 2025, 2 on February 23, 2024.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Texas | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.21 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.26 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.98 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.07 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.88 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 41.4% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 20.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.34 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.30 on weekdays and 2.98 on weekends, 10% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.23 in April to June 2025 to 3.21 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.21 | 0.26 | 3.30 | 2.98 | 0.3% | 0 of 90 | 83 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.25 | 0.25 | 3.34 | 3.03 | 0.2% | 0 of 92 | 82 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.32 | 0.19 | 3.44 | 3.02 | 0.1% | 0 of 92 | 78 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.23 | 0.20 | 3.32 | 3.00 | 0.2% | 0 of 91 | 76 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Texas, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.33 | 0.40 | 3.50 | 2.93 | 2.2% | 0.7% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.03 | $16.97 to $20.71 | 88,680 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.92 | $27.46 to $32.89 | 57,560 |
| Registered nurses | $46.14 | $38.06 to $50.53 | 271,380 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Texas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.6 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 21.7 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.3 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.1 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 20.9 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 5.2 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Inspiration Hills Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 51.5% · Texas: 116 better, 50 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 8 eligible stays.
10.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Texas: 0 better, 9 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 32 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Texas: 4 better, 11 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 17 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Texas57.3% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 12 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Texas0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 18 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Texas1.3% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 18 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Texas98.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 8 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: HAMILTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Paramount Healthcare, a group of 8 nursing homes averaging 3.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allante Properties of Texas, LP | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 05/01/2023 | |
| Prince, Danny | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 05/01/2023 | |
| Hooper, Grady | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/01/2023 | |
| Dkp Investments, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/01/2023 | |
| The Williamsburg Care Company, LP | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/01/2023 | |
| Prince, Danny | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2023 | |
| Wampler, Deb | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2023 | |
| Allante Properties of Texas, LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2023 | |
| The Williamsburg Care Company, LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/22/2025 | |
| Aziz, Wesam | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2023 | |
| Prince, Danny | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2023 | |
| Wampler, Deb | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2023 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Texas. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.