1621 Coit Road, Plano, TX 75075 · Collin County · (972) 596-7930
160 certified beds, about 75 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1990
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 455861 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 26, 2025, inspectors cited 11 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 42 health citations since May 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $9,240 in the last three years; the largest was $9,240, and the latest is dated February 4, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.42 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.46 of those hours.
88.5% 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 42 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, 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 and adult protective services where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities) in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for neglect reporting. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide specialized rehabilitative services for one of five residents (Resident #1) reviewed for specialized rehabilitative services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received Occupational Therapy (OT), in accordance with her plan of treatment. This failure could place the residents at risk of not meeting their highest practicable well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 2 (Residents #1 and #2) of 5 residents reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to provide Residents #1 and #2 with showers based on their weekly shower/bathing schedule. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the care they require to maintain their highest practical well-being, and could result in low self-esteem, anxiety, embarrassment, and a decline in their quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to formulate an advanced directive for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2 and Resident #3) of 8 residents reviewed for Advanced Directives. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #1, Resident #2 and Resident #3's OOH-DNR (Out of Hospital-Do Not Resuscitate) were completed correctly with both signatures of the resident/family and that it was signed by a physician making the forms invalid. This failure could affect all residents who have implemented an Advanced Directive and established their choice not to be resuscitated at the risk of receiving CPR (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) against their wishes.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident call light system was maintained within reach for 4 of 6 residents (Resident #14, Resident #3, Resident #21, and Resident #69) reviewed for call light system access. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14 had access to their call light by allowing it to remain on the floor at the foot of the bed, out of the resident's reach. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3 had access to their call light by allowing it to remain draped over a light fixture about the resident's bed, out of the resident's reach. The facility failed to ensure Resident #21 had access to their call light by allowing the cord to become unattached from the clip, resulting in the call light to dangle from the wall, out of the resident's reach. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 5 (Resident's #54, #43, #66, #75, and #72) of 6 residents reviewed for ADL care. 1. The facility failed to provide Resident #54 with timely incontinence care on 08/24/25. 2. The facility failed to provide Residents #43, #66, #75, and #72 with showers based on their weekly shower/bathing schedule. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the care they require to maintain their highest practical well-being, and could result in low self-esteem, anxiety, embarrassment, and a decline in their quality of life. 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for 1 (Bathroom [ROOM NUMBER]A/B) of 6 bathrooms reviewed for environmental concerns. The facility failed to ensure the bathroom located in room [ROOM NUMBER]A/B was effectively cleaned, as there was a large pile of feces located on top of a board that had been placed over the bathtub, as well as dried feces that appeared to have been smeared on top of the board. This failure could affect all residents, staff, and the public by placing them at risk for diminished quality of life due to the lack of a well-kept environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that PRN orders for psychotropic drugs were limited to 14 days and could not be renewed, unless the attending physician or prescribing practitioner evaluated the resident for the appropriateness of the medication for one (Resident #66) of six residents on psychoactive medication in that: The facility failed to ensure that Resident #66 had orders for psychotropic medication Lorazepam (brand name Ativan, a medication in the benzodiazepine class used to reduce anxiety, help with sleep, or control seizures) that did not contain PRN orders beyond 14 days without an end date and reassessment. This failure could place residents at risk for receiving unnecessary medications and adverse drug reactions. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to refer all level II residents and all residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition for level II resident review for one (Resident #8) of six residents reviewed for PASRR services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8 was properly screened for PASRR services. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving specialized PASRR services which would enhance their highest level of functioning and could contribute to residents decline in physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 1 (Resident #33) of 5 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #33 received ordered treatments for a skin abrasion she sustained on her arm. This failure placed residents at risk of having untreated skin conditions, which could lead to delays in treatment and worsening of conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure that a resident receives care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers and does not develop pressure ulcers unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrates that they were unavoidable; and a resident with pressure ulcers receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for two (Residents #54 and #79) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to provide appropriate treatment to Residents #54 and #79 on 08/24/25. This failure placed residents at risk for decline in quality of life and the wounds being infected or deteriorating.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 1 (Resident #73) of 6 residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #73 did not have access to disposable razors. This failure could place residents at risk of injury or harm, as well as contribute to avoidable accidents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who needed respiratory care, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #80) of 4 residents reviewed for oxygen administration. The facility failed to follow Resident #80's physician order for continuous oxygen. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving incorrect or inadequate oxygen support and could result in a decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to, in accordance with State and Federal laws, ensure all drugs were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, and permit only authorized personnel to have access to these drugs for 1 (Resident #73) of 5 residents reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure Resident #73 did not have unsecured multivitamins in his room. This failure could place residents at risk of not being monitored for their medications, adverse reactions, and drug diversion.
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 2 of 6 residents (Residents #79 and #2) reviewed for infection control. 1. RN B failed to complete hand hygiene while providing wound care and incontinent care to Resident #79. 2. CNA C failed to complete hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #2. This failure could place residents at risk for infections and cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for decent living environment. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had access to her bathroom. This failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life due to a lake of a well-kept environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment were reported no later than 2 hours if the events that caused the allegation did involve abuse or serious bodily injury to HHS, for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment. The facility failed to report to HHS within two hours, when a staff member reported CNA A spoke rudely and pushed Resident #1 down the memory care hallway on 07/05/25. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse or mistreatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for three (Resident #1, Resident #2 and Resident #4) of seven residents reviewed for treatment/services for pressure ulcers. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2, who had a pressure ulcer on his coccyx, had a low air loss mattress pump with the correct settings for appropriate pressure redistribution on 06/18/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3 and Resident #4 had a functioning low air loss mattress available to use to promote healing of their sacral wounds on 06/18/25. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3 wound dressing was changed daily as per orders. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 two (Resident #2 and Resident #5) of seven residents reviewed for medications and pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to administer Resident #2's blood pressure medication Carvedilol in accordance with physician orders, by not obtaining his blood pressure prior to administering the medication on nine occasions from 06/03/25 through 06/18/25. 2. The facility failed to administer Resident #5's blood pressure medication Midodrine in accordance with physician orders, by not obtaining his blood pressure prior to administering the medication on four occasions from 06/07/25 through 06/10/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are complete; accurately documented; readily accessible; and systematically organized for three (Residents #2 , #3 and #7) of seven residents reviewed for resident records. 1. The facility failed to document if wound care was provided for Resident #2 in June 2025 on four occasions: 06/10/25, 06/14/25, 06/16/25 and 06/17/25. 2. The facility failed to document if wound care was provided for Resident #3 in June 2025 on three occasions: 06/10/25, 06/15/25 and 06/16/25. 3. The facility failed to document if wound care was provided for Resident #7 in May 2025 on four occasions: 05/05/25, 05/07/25, 05/21/25 and 05/26/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was 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 6 residents (Residents #1, #2, and #3) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Residents #1, #2, and #3 were provided their showers as scheduled for the month of May 2025. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, decreased quality of life, and decreased self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices for 1 (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received treatment immediately after she complained of having symptoms of a urinary tract infection. This failure could place residents at risk for a delay in treatment or diagnosis, a decline in the resident's condition, harm and/or the need for hospitalization and prolonged treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents right to retain their personal clothing for one of one resident, (Resident #4) reviewed for resident's rights. The facility failed to allow Resident #4 to exercise the right to retain and use personal possessions, including clothing. This failure placed residents at risk of for anxiety, frustration, and decreased quality of life who retain their personal clothing in their room.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, homelike environment for 1 (Resident #2) of 4 reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to: - make sure there were no black/brown stains on the tiles in Resident #2's shower and bathroom. - remove a stain on the ceiling in Resident #2's shower. - secure 3 tiles in front of Resident #2's bathroom sink. - tighten a loose toilet seat in Resident #2's bathroom. - replace missing tiles next to the floor on the right side of the toilet in Resident #2's bathroom. - replace an outlet in Resident #2's room which had half a missing plug-in and failed to place a cover on an outlet which had a half missing plug-in. - fix scratches and areas of missing paint on the walls in Resident #2's bedroom. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure CNA A did not abuse Resident #1 on 03/14/25 by taking a private photo of her. This was determined to be past non-compliance. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The noncompliance began on 03/14/25 and ended on 03/16/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure placed residents at risk of being abused by having their photo taken.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, 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 two (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of four residents, reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA B changed gloves and performed hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident #1. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA C performed hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident #2. These failures placed residents at risk for healthcare associated cross contamination and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 3 (Residents #1, #2 and #3) of five residents reviewed for ADL assistance. The facility failed to provide Residents #1, #2 and #3 with consistent showers/bed bath and timely incontinent care. The failures could place the residents at risk of resident's needs, safety and psychosocial well-being not being met. Findings Include: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 02/04/25 reflected the resident was a [AGE] year old female and she was admitted on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed the 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 and determined by considering the number, acuity, and diagnoses of the facility's resident population with accordance with 3 (Residents #1, #2, #3) of 5 residents reviewed for sufficient staffing. The facility failed to ensure the facility had sufficient staffing to meet the needs of Residents #1, #2, #3. This failure could place the residents at risk of resident's needs, safety and psychosocial well-being not being met. Findings Include: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 02/04/25 reflected the resident was [AGE] years old female and she was admitted on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs fo (Resident #3) reviewed for resident call system, in that. 1. Resident #3s call lights was on the floor and not within reach on 08/24/2024. This could place the residents at risk of not receiving the care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to protect the confidentiality of personal health care information for one of three (Resident #1) residents reviewed for confidentiality of records. The facility failed to ensure LVN A locked and closed the laptop during the medication pass exposing Resident #1's personal information to include some of his medications. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk for loss of privacy and dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for competent staff, in that: 1. CNA C was not competent in gastrostomy feeding tube nutrition and care. CNA C adjusted Resident #1's feeding pump without alerting a nurse that there was liquid leaking. This failure placed residents with feeding tubes at risk for complications to include aspiration, nausea, vomiting and/or diarrhea, residents who required two staff for bed mobility at risk for discomfort/injury and for residents not to receive needed nursing assessments.
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 (Resident #1) of 4 residents reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility failed to ensure the physician visit were documented for the correct resident. Resident #1's file contained physician visit notes for the wrong resident. These failures could place residents at risk for medication and /or treatment errors and omissions in care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designated to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection for one (Resident #1 ) of four residents reviewed for infection control. CNA C failed to use proper infection control prevention while tending to the G Tube for Resident #1 This failure could place residents at-risk of cross contamination which could result in infections or illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to be adequately equipped to allow for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area for one of three residents (Resident #3) reviewed for resident call system, in that. Resident# 3's call light was not working on 08/26/2024. These could place the residents at risk of not receiving the care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible for 1 (Resident #17) of 11 residents reviewed accident hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #17's walker was repaired or replaced after it had been damaged during transport in February 2024. Resident #17 attempted to fix the walker himself utilizing zip ties, but the walker still malfunctioned and was described by Resident #17 as being scary to use. This failure could place residents at an increased risk of accidents, such as falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who are fed by enteral means received the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #25) reviewed for gastrostomy tube management. The facility failed to ensure Resident #25 was provided with the correct water flushes before and after medication administration through a gastrostomy tube (g-tube, feeding tube). This failure could place residents who received medications by gastrostomy tube at risk for injury, aspiration into the lungs (fluid or food enter the lungs accidently), decreased quality of life, hospitalization and decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' drug regimens were free from unnecessary drugs for two (Residents #25 and #45) of five residents whose records were reviewed for psychotropic drugs, in that: 1. Resident #25 had an order for the antipsychotic medication Risperdal 3mg, per the pharmacy recommendations the medication order was changed to 2mg but had not been implemented 2. Resident #45 had an order for the antipsychotic medication lorazepam as needed used longer than the 14 days. These failures placed residents at risk for being over medicated or experiencing undesirable side effects and could cause a physical or psychosocial decline in health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for two (Residents #25, #30) of five residents reviewed for ADL's. 1. Resident #25 did not receive shower per her shower schedule. 2. Resident #30 did not receive shower per her shower schedule. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the care they require to maintain their highest practical well-being, and could result in low self-esteem, anxiety, embarrassment, and a decline in their quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who are fed by enteral means received the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for (Resident #8) reviewed for gastrostomy tube management. The facility failed to check the Resident #8's residual before administering medications via gastrostomy tube (G-tube: A tube directly inserted through the skin to the stomach to deliver nutrition). This failure could place residents who receive enteral feedings by G-tube at risk for injury, aspiration into the lungs (fluid or food enter the lungs accidently), decreased quality of life, hospitalization and decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services to ensure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, administering, and securing of medications for one medication carts (700/500 hall nurses' medication cart) of two medication carts reviewed for pharmacy services in that: The 500/700 hall medication cart had expired medications. The failure could place residents at risk for not receiving therapeutic dosages of their medications as ordered by the physician and a potential for decreased health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that the medication error rate was not 5% or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 6%, based on 3 errors of 48 opportunities, which involved two residents of 10 residents observed (Residents #9 and #27) and 1 of 2 staff observed during medication administration for medication errors. The facility failed to ensure the medications were administered per the physician orders for Residents #9 and #27. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving therapeutic effects of their medications and possible adverse reactions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of infection for three (Resident # 29, Residents#150, and Resident #200) of four Residents observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure: 1-.CNA A completed hand hygiene while performing incontinent care for (Resident#150). 2. RN B completed hand hygiene while performing wound care for (Resident#29). 3. RN B completed hand hygiene while performing wound care for (Resident#200). 4. RN B prepared a clean field for the dressing change supplies while performing wound care for (Resident#29) 5. RN B prepared a clean field for the dressing change supplies while performing wound care for (Resident #200). These failures could place the residents at risk for infection.
19 fire safety citations on file: 2 on August 26, 2025, 14 on July 11, 2024, 3 on May 17, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 4, 2025 | Fine | $9,240 |
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) | 3.42 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.46 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.00 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.02 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.94 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 88.5% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 87.5% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.54 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 3.59 on weekdays and 3.00 on weekends, 16% 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 2.89 in April to June 2025 to 3.42 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 | 3.42 | 0.46 | 3.59 | 3.00 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 75 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.13 | 0.40 | 3.28 | 2.74 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 78 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.19 | 0.45 | 3.37 | 2.75 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 78 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.89 | 0.40 | 3.03 | 2.52 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 79 |
| 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 | 33.9 | 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 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.6 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 28.1 | 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 | 6.5 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 38.0 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 13.6 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Landmark of Plano Rehabilitation and Nursing Cente'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. 19 eligible stays.
11.4% 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. 44 eligible stays.
8.4% this home
No different from the national rate
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. 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.
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. 8 residents counted.
9.1% 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.
8.8% 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. 2 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: NOCONA HOSPITAL DISTRICT. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nocona Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/01/2019 |
| Admire-Webb, Paula | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Brown, Ronald | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Ferguson, Kristal | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Keck, Robert | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Koontz, Ken | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Lemon, Cris | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| May, Charles | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Meekins, Greg | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/18/1997 | |
| Huggins, Linda | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Willig, Zachary | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Meekins, Greg | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/18/1997 | |
| Plano II Enterprises, L.L.C. | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Blake, Gary | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Blake, Malisa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Plano II Enterprises, L.L.C. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/14/2025 | |
| Blake, Gary | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Blake, Malisa | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Henson, Harry | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/14/2025 | |
| Raju, Jerrill | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/14/2025 |
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.