3800 Marina Dr, Lake Worth, TX 76135 · Tarrant County · (817) 237-7231
140 certified beds, about 70 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1990
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 455903 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 8, 2026, inspectors cited 2 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 30 health citations since September 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (3 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $33,845 in the last three years; the largest was $17,889, and the latest is dated May 23, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.26 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.24 of those hours.
93.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Creative Solutions in Healthcare, an affiliated group of 149 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident has a right to secure, confidential personal medical records; in that:The facility failed to secure residents' personal health care information using an instant messaging phone application for 7 of 9 staff (LVN A, LVN B, CNA C, CNA D, ADON, DON, and Administrator) who used the unsecured phone application to communicate about the facility's residents. This failure could place the residents at risk of unauthorized individuals knowing their personal and private health information.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility staff failed to ensure staff reported potential use of medication not provided by the facility to the ADM and DON for 1 of 5 (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. CNA B failed to report Resident #1 told her he had been taking medication for weight loss provided by family. This failure could place residents at risk of adverse effects to medications or medication interactions, that can lead to residents not meeting their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, 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 diseases and infection for 08 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5, Resident #6, Resident #7, and Resident #8,) of 12 residents reviewed for infection control. The facility failed on 03/11/26 to ensure infection control procedures were followed when the MA failed to sanitize the wrist blood pressure cuff between each resident when she obtained blood pressure readings. This failure could place residents at risk of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse was on duty in the facility for a minimum of eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week, for 6 of 26 weekend days (11/01/2025, 11/02/2025, 11/15/2025, 11/16/2025, 11/29/2025, 11/30/2025) reviewed for RN coverage. The facility failed to have RN coverage on the following dates in 2025:- 11/01/2025, 11/02/2025, 11/15/2025, 11/16/2025, 11/29/2025, 11/30/2025 This failure could place residents at risk of not having their nursing and medical needs met, and other direct care staff not receiving sufficient oversight.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide safe and secured storage of drugs and biologicals by not keeping medication in locked compartments, for 1 of 5 carts reviewed for medication storage in that:LVN A failed to lock treatment cart while not in use. This failure could result in physical injuries to residents; drug diversions, ingestion of medications causing adverse effects and violation of HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act).
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to protect residents' right to personal privacy and confidentiality of his or her personal and medical records for 10 of 74 residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5, Resident #6, Resident #7, Resident #8, Resident #9, Resident #10) reviewed for confidentiality of records. CNA A provided a list containing residents' names and medical appointment details to Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk for psychosocial damage, emotional damage and potential fraudulent.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review 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 diseases and infections for 1 of 4 Residents (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA B used the required PPE for Resident #1, who was on enhanced barrier precautions due to her wound, and indwelling foley catheter, while assisting LVN A with Resident #1's wound care and getting Resident#1 dressed on 04/07/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN A used the required PPE for Resident #1, who was on enhanced barrier precautions due to her wound, and indwelling foley catheter, while performing wound care for Resident #1on 04/07/25. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to report an alleged violation involving neglect, misappropriation of resident property, exploitation, or mistreatment, and does not result in serious bodily injury not later than 24 hours to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, including to the State survey and certification agency and adult protective services in accordance with State law for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for misappropriation of resident's property and exploitation. The Housekeeper failed to report to the facility administrator who was the abuse coordinator that Resident #1 was missing money totaling $90 when Resident #1 first reported the missing money weeks prior to 03/11/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident had a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living for three of 13 residents (Residents #1, #2 and #3) reviewed for environmental concerns. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's restroom was cleaned daily. 2. The facility failed to ensure Residents #1, #2 and #3's restroom had hot water. These failures could place residents at risk for a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteFACILITY Resident Council 10/16/24 09:57 AM Omb TC: [NAME] Omb: [NAME] (volunteer) Residents in attendance: [NAME]- RC President [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] (late arrival) Res says staff have not responded to requests/recommendations from residents or council meetings/ same req each month; per Adm res have rights unless it conflicts with her; res state no reasons being given for not responding to , when res go back they are told someone has dropped the ball and start over from sq one Grievance Rep is ADM and she is not responding per residents (per Omb grievance process is supposed to be started with SW) wait times for care 30-45 mins on average; still issues with staff spending /focusing on personal conversations and on personal cell phones during time providing res care; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to review the risks and benefits of bed rails and enabler/grab bars (smaller bars used by the person in bed to reposition themselves), with the resident or resident representative, conduct a safety assessment, and obtain informed consent prior to installation for two (Residents #3 and #63) of six residents observed for bed rails/enabler bars. The facility failed to have an informed consent, assessment of the resident for risk of entrapment, or care planning for the safe use of bed rails/enabler bars for Residents #3 and #63. This failure could affect residents who used bed rails/enabler bars at risk of the resident/responsible party not being aware of the risks, informed consent not being obtained from the resident or responsible party, and care plan not being properly documented.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for one (Resident #37) of nine residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure LVN C did not administer expired insulin to Resident #37 on [DATE] that had expired on [DATE]. These failures could place residents at risk for altered medications due to being expired and could result in residents not receiving the intended therapeutic effects of their medications causing a health decline.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate less than 5 percent. There were 2 errors out of 26 opportunities which resulted in a 7 percent medication error rate for two (Resident #25, #30, and #37) of nine residents reviewed for medication errors. 1. CMA B administered medication Methocarbamol 500 MG belonging to Resident #30 to Resident #25. 2. LVN C did not follow manufacturer's recommendation for Lantus Insulin when she administered it to Resident #37. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the maximum benefit of the medication, decreases controlling conditions and overall well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, and included the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable for 1 of 4 medication carts (nurse med cart) reviewed for labeling and storage. 1. The facility failed to date and remove expired insulin from the nurse medication cart in the secure unit. 2. The facility failed to ensure that 3 insulin pens were stored separate from office stationery materials pens, markers, paper clips and rubber bands. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to provide radiology or other diagnostic services to meet the needs of its residents in a timely manner for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for radiology services. The facility failed to follow up on Resident #1's x-ray results in a timely manner. The facility failed to follow up on x-ray results that revealed a fracture of the right tibial plateau. Resident #1 was sent to hospital on [DATE] at 10:10 am. The noncompliance was identified at PNC. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) began on 05/12/2024 and ended on 05/15/2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. These failures resulted in delayed diagnosis, medical treatment, and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for one (Resident #1) of seven residents reviewed for call lights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's call button was placed within reach. This failure could place dependent residents at risk of injuries and unmet needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation for 1 of 6 residents (Residents #1) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to protect Residents #1 from neglect when they failed to provide the necessary care devices to prevent injury from a fall. Resident #1 had a history of subdural hemorrhage with brain injury and a previous order for a fall mat. The CNA was aware the fall mat was missing and Resident #1 experienced convulsions/seizures resulting in a fall. Resident #1 sustained a skin tear from the fall. These failures could place residents at risk of abuse and neglect, serious injury, serious harm, serious impairment, pain, mental anguish, or death. On 02/28/24 at 3:38 PM an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained free of accidents hazards and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 (Resident #1) of 8 residents reviewed for accidents hazards. The facility failed to protect Residents #1 from accidents when they failed to provide the necessary care devices to prevent injury from a fall. Resident #1 had a history of subdural hemorrhage with brain injury and a previous order for a fall mat. The CNA was aware the fall mat was missing and Resident #1 experienced convulsions/seizures resulting in a fall. Resident #1 sustained a skin tear from the fall. This failure could affect 8 Residents at the facility that received fall precautions and interventions resulting in serious harm and injuries. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to implement their written policies and procedures regarding allegations of neglect for 1 of 4 resident reviewed for abuse. (Resident #1) The facility failed to implement their policy on reporting neglect when Resident #1 fell out of bed and sustained 2 injuries to his forehead on 02/25/24. These deficient practices could place residents at risk for abuse, neglect, and not having their needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for neglect. The facility failed to implement their policy on reporting neglect when Resident #1 fell out of bed and sustained 2 injuries to his forehead on 02/25/24. These deficient practices could place residents at risk for abuse, neglect, and not having their needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for accidents and hazards in that: CNA A failed to report that Resident #1 was involved in a car accident on 10/31/23, which resulted in resident having untreated stiffness and pain. This failure could place residents at risk of actual harm due to untimely interventions and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received necessary services to maintain grooming, and personal hygiene for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #2, Resident #3, and Resident #4) reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2, and Resident #4 received timely incontinent care. The facility failed to provide Resident #2, Resident #3 and Resident #4 assistance with baths on a consistent basis. This failure could put residents at risk of poor personal hygiene, impaired skin integrity, and decreased feelings of self-worth and dignity. Findings Included: Resident #2 Record review of Resident #2's electronic Face Sheet, dated 10/16/23, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #2 had diagnoses which included the following: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 3 (Residents #2, #3, and #4) out 5 residents reviewed for sufficient staff. The facility failed to have sufficient staff to provide Resident #2, and Resident #4 received timely incontinent care. The facility failed to provide Resident #2, Resident #3 and Resident #4 assistance with baths on a consistent basis. This failure placed dependent residents at risk for poor hygiene, not receiving care in a timely manner, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, 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 diseases and infections for all 19 residents in the secured unit reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to accurately test CNA A and HK B, who worked in the facility's secured unit, during a COVID-19 (contagious respiratory disease) outbreak. This failure could place the residents at a risk for potentially exposing them to COVID-19. Findings Included: In an interview on 10/13/23 at 9:22 AM, the DON stated Resident #1, who was in the secured unit, had symptoms of COVID-19, so she was tested on [DATE] and was positive. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to protect the right to personal privacy and confidentiality of personal and medical records of (Resident #41) 1 of 8 residents interviewed for care. The facility failed to protect the dignity and privacy of Resident #41's medical care by orally communicating with a family member her medical conditions and her refusal to take medications. This failure could place residents to experience humiliation and embarrassment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 1(Resident #11) of 5 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #11's MDS accurately reflected the resident's functional status for showers/baths. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk for inaccurate and incomplete MDS assessment which could result in residents not receiving correct care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs, for 1 (Resident #11) of 5 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to accurately reflect Resident #11's need for assistance for showers or follow Resident #11's care plan for showers. This failure could place residents at risk for not being provided necessary care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary services to maintain acceptable grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (Resident #11) of 5 reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #11 received showers. This failure placed residents at risk for poor hygiene, dignity issues and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status, unless the residents clinical condition demonstrated that it was not possible or the residents' preferences indicated otherwise, based on a resident's comprehensive assessment for 1 (Resident # 62) of 5 residents reviewed for weight loss. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 62 was assessed for interventions after the resident had a 10% weight loss within 6 days. This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection for 4 (Residents #33, #59, #68, #328) of 19 residents that received oral medication. The facility failed to ensure LVN A performed standard hand hygiene after handling medications and water cups to Residents #33, #59, #68, #328. This failure could place resident at risk for infection and can have significant consequences on residents.
22 fire safety citations on file: 7 on January 8, 2026, 8 on October 17, 2024, 7 on September 8, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2024 | Fine | $15,956 |
| February 29, 2024 | Fine | $17,889 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
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) | 3.26 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.24 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.99 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.77 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.24 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 93.0% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.40 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 3.37 on weekdays and 2.99 on weekends, 11% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.30 in April to June 2025 to 3.26 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 | 3.26 | 0.24 | 3.37 | 2.99 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 70 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.16 | 0.23 | 3.28 | 2.87 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 73 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.24 | 0.24 | 3.36 | 2.93 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 74 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.30 | 0.24 | 3.44 | 2.93 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 74 |
| 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.
| 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 | 14.9 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 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 | 2.9 | 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 | 18.3 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.4 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.5 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 21.4 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.7 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Lake Lodge Nursing & Rehabilitation'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. 18 eligible stays.
10.6% 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. 27 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. 15 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.
0.0% this home
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. 22 residents counted.
3.8% this home
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. 22 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: LAKE WORTH I ENTERPRISES, LLC. CMS links this home to Creative Solutions in Healthcare, a group of 149 nursing homes averaging 2.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Huggins, Linda | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 12/01/2020 | |
| Creative Solutions in Healthcare Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2021 | |
| Blake, Gary | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2020 | |
| Blake, Malisa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2020 |
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.