1100 Galveston St., Laredo, TX 78040 · Webb County · (956) 723-2068
112 certified beds, about 68 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1994
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675396 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 22, 2025, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 28 health citations since April 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $8,021 in the last three years; the largest was $8,021, and the latest is dated May 10, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.19 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.70 of those hours.
36.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Wellsential Health, an affiliated group of 67 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 28 health citations on file.
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 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control practices. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had the appropriate isolation and precaution signage posted outside of her door or room. Resident only needed the EBP sign, but she had both an EBP and droplet precaution sign on her door. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had an infection control physician's order for Enhanced Barrier Precautions to be re-implemented after Contact Isolation had ended 06/24/2026. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for call light placement. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's call light was within reach on 06/29/26. This failure could place residents at risk for needs and accommodations being unmet and a delay in care. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food per professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for storage, preparation, and sanitation. The facility failed to ensure dishes were cleaned after washing and not used for service. The facility failed to ensure the utensils were in good condition. The facility failed to ensure personal items were not in the prep areas. The facility failed to ensure a cabinet door was safe to open. The facility failed to ensure table scraps were disposed of properly. The facility failed to ensure personal items were separated from leftovers in refrigerator #D2. The facility failed to ensure food items in refrigerators #A1, and #D2, and freezers #B3, #C3, and #D2 were labeled, dated, and stored properly. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 2 glucometers (device used to measure the amount of glucose in a resident's blood) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure the glucometer in the nurse cart for halls 100, 200 and 400 were tested for accuracy and recorded in the glucometer logbook on 07/01/25, 07/02/25, 07/07/25, 07/08/25, and 07/21/25 in the month of July. These failures could place residents at risk of receiving either too much insulin or not enough.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to privacy for 1 (Resident #5) of 17 residents reviewed for privacy. The facility failed to ensure the WCN provided privacy for Resident #5 while performing his wound care. This failure could cause residents to feel uncomfortable, disrespected, and possibly a loss of dignity due to a lack of privacy.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 for one resident (Resident #7) of 17 residents whose care plans were reviewed. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's comprehensive care plan was updated was developed and implemented after starting anticoagulant (blood thinner) medication on 04/26/25. The deficient practice could place residents in the facility at risk of not being provided with the necessary care or services, and the implementation of personalized plan of care developed to address their specific needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles reviewed for medications stored in 1 of 1 medication rooms reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure the medication room was locked at 11:21 AM on 07/20/25 This failure could place residents in the facility at risk of drug diversion or misuse of medications leading to harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the right to be free from abuse for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was free from physical abuse on 01/13/25 when Resident #2 grabbed Resident #1 ' s head with both of his hands and hit Resident #1 ' s head against the wall several times then punched Resident #1 on the left side of his face with a closed fist. This failure could place residents at risk for physical, mental and psychosocial harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review 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, and mental and psychosocial needs, for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #1 to address the risk for falls and the fall mat. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions and care to meet their current needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments for 1 of 5 medication carts located at the nursing station observed for compliance. The facility failed to ensure one medication cart found at the nursing station for residents in the 500/600 hall was not left unlocked and unattended by RN A. This failure could place residents at risk of access and ingestion of non-narcotic medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, for three residents (Resident #14, Resident #30, and Resident #49) of 24 residents whose care plans were reviewed, in that: 1) Resident #14's comprehensive care plan was not revised after being prescribed Albuterol Sulfate Inhalation Nebulization Solution on 5/1/24 to reflect a respiratory plan of care. 2) Resident #30's comprehensive care plan was not revised after her quarterly safe smoking evaluations (assessments) changed. 3) Resident #49's comprehensive care plan failed to include he was a smoker. This failure could place residents at risk for inadequate care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for sanitation. 1. The facility failed to ensure juice dispenser nozzles were sanitary. 2. The facility failed to ensure equipment was clean and sanitized. 3. The facility failed to ensure the kitchen staff was following their policies. These failures could place residents at risk of foodborne illnesses.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to post the results of the most recent survey of the facility in a place readily accessible to residents, family members, and legal representatives for ten (Resident # 3,28,37,42,48,50,55,57,64, and 169) of ten residents interviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure the most recent survey results were readily accessible to residents, family members, and legal representatives. This failure could place residents, family members, and legal representatives at risk of not being able to fully exercise their right to be informed of the facility's survey results and citation history.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents' right to privacy for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #32) reviewed for privacy. The facility failed to ensure RN A provided privacy by closing Resident #32's door or privacy curtain during administration of a subcutaneous insulin injection into Resident #32's abdomen on 06/25/2024 at 10:59 AM. This failure could place residents at risk of having their bodies exposed to the public, resulting in low self-esteem and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility nursing staff failed to demonstrate competencies and skills sets necessary to care for residents' needs, as identified through resident assessments, and described in the plan of care, for one resident (Resident #14) of 24 residents reviewed, in that: -The facility failed to revise orders for Resident #14's code status from full code to DNR after receiving a DNR form from Resident #14's family member on [DATE]. Resident #14 had both CPR and DNR reflected in their orders. This deficient practice could affect residents who require care and monitoring and place them at risk of not receiving the care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a comprehensive infection prevention and control program that included employing proper signage on the doors of resident's rooms to prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 28 residents (Resident #51 and Resident #19) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to place a readily visible EBP sign on the door of Resident #51 who was actively on EBP which requires an individual to don gown and gloves when performing patient care on 06/24/2024 at 11:35 AM. 2. The facility failed to place a sign on Resident #19's room door who was being tested for C. Diff(clostridioides difficile- a type of bacteria that is contagious and causes diarrhea and inflammation of the colon and can be life threatening) on 06/24/24. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for one resident (Resident #1) reviewed for supervision. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received adequate supervision while Resident #1 eloped from the facility during lunch time. This failure could place residents requiring supervision at risk for injury and accidents with potential for more than minimal harm. The noncompliance was identified as Past Non-Compliance. The IJ began on 10/17/23 and ended on 10/18/23. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the investigation began.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments, person-centered care plan to reflect the current condition for 1 of 11 residents (Residents #2) reviewed for care plan revisions. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's care plan was comprehensive and updated to reflect Resident #2's fall preventions. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions meet their current needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with the comprehensive person-centered care plan and in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 resident (Resident #1) of 8 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to follow the physicians order on 08/16/2022 in accordance with the care plan for Resident #1's Wanderguard bracelet (device designed to prevent elderly individuals with dementia from wandering outside a perimeter) to be placed on her right arm. The Wanderguard bracelet was instead placed around her right ankle. This failure could place residents requiring supervision who had a Wanderguard at risk for injury and accidents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 5 of 5 staff (Dietary staff A, B, C, D and E) and 1 of 1 kitchen, in that: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents had the right to formulate an advance directive for 6 of 22 residents (Residents #3, #30, #31, #35, #57 and #59) reviewed for advanced directives. Resident #3, #30, #31, #35, #57 and #59 were incorrectly filled out or missing required information. Residents #3, #30, #31, #35, #57, and #59 were listed as a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) but had Out-of-Hospital Do Not Resuscitate (OOH-DNR) forms that were incorrectly filled out or missing required information. This failure could place residents at risk for not having their end of life wishes honored and incomplete records.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to meet the highest practicable physical, mental, psychosocial well-being for13 of 22 residents (Residents #4, #12, #19, #20, #28, #30, #31, #33, #42, #45, #47, #56, and #59) reviewed for care plans as follows: Resident #4 did not have a care plan for behavior. Resident #12 did not have a care plan for vision and dehydration. Resident #19 did not have a care plan for communication, falls and dehydration. Resident #20 did not have a care plan for vision, communication and dental care. Resident #28 did not have a care plan for dehydration. Resident #30 did not have a care plan for mood and dental care. Resident #31 did not have a care plan for vision and communication. Resident #33 did not have a care plan for vision and pain. Resident #42 did not have a care plan for dehydration. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, and permit only authorized personnel to have access to the keys, in that: One of one medication rooms was unlocked and unattended on four different occasions. LVN A left medications on storage cart unlocked and unattended in the hallway. These failures could result in the theft or misuse of medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable, attractive and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 3 of 3 meals. 1) The facility failed to provide food that was palatable for 3 of 3 meal observed (4/04/23, lunch and dinner) and 4/05/23, lunch). These failures could place residents at risk of decreased food intake, hunger, and unwanted weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received and the facility provided food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs, for 3 of 3 meals observed for 5 of 5 residents with orders for pureed diets (Residents #11, 18, 37, 43 and 49); in that: 1) The facility failed to provide food that was in a form to meet resident needs during 3 of 3 meal observed (4/04/23, lunch and dinner) and 4/05/23, lunch) for 5 of 5 residents with orders for pureed diets (Residents #11, 18, 37, 43 and 49). These failures could place residents at risk of decreased food intake and choking.
Inspectors wroteBased on, observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident had the right to make choices about aspects of his or her life in the facility that were significant to the resident for 2 of 22 residents (Residents #19 and #62) reviewed for self-determination in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #19 received daily showers as requested. The facility failed to ensure Resident #62 receive daily showers as requested. This failure could place residents at risk for being denied the opportunity to exercise his or her autonomy regarding things that are important in their life and decrease their quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to, based on a resident's comprehensive assessment, ensure that a resident who is fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment and services to restore, if possible, oral eating skills and to prevent complications of enteral feeding including but not limited to aspiration pneumonia, diarrhea, vomiting, dehydration, metabolic abnormalities, and nasal-pharyngeal ulcers for 2 of 5 residents with gastrostomy tubes (Residents #53 and #57); in that: 1) (Resident #53 and #57 had G-tube feedings that were not administered according to physician's orders, and 2) G-tube flushing equipment (flushing syringes) was not stored in a sanitary manner after use (Residents #53 and #57). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure PRN orders for psychotropic drugs were limited to 14 days unless the attending physician or prescribing practitioner believed, and documented, that it was appropriate for the PRN order to be extended beyond 14 days, in that two of seven residents (Resident #4 and Resident #58) continued to receive psychotropic medications PRN for more than 14 days without a physician addressing the continued use of the medication: - Resident #4 continued to have a PRN order for Lorazepam(anti-anxiety) 0.5mg after 14 days without an evaluation by the physician for continued treatment. - Resident #58 continued to have a PRN order for Lorazepam(anti-anxiety) 0.5mg after 14 days without an evaluation by the physician for continued treatment. [...]
4 fire safety citations on file: 1 on July 22, 2025, 1 on June 26, 2024, 2 on April 6, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2024 | Fine | $8,021 |
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) | 3.19 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.70 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.61 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.87 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.63 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 36.7% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 30.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.24 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 3.43 on weekdays and 2.61 on weekends, 24% 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 2.84 in April to June 2025 to 3.19 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 | 3.19 | 0.70 | 3.43 | 2.61 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 68 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.29 | 0.67 | 3.52 | 2.72 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 65 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 2.82 | 0.59 | 3.07 | 2.19 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 68 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.84 | 0.58 | 3.06 | 2.27 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 66 |
| 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 | 16.5 | 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 | 2.1 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 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 | 11.4 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.1 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Laredo South Nursing and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (31.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
31.7% this home
Worse than the national rate
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. 36 eligible stays.
11.0% 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. 42 eligible stays.
8.9% 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. 41 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: UVALDE COUNTY HOSPITAL AUTHORITY. CMS links this home to Wellsential Health, a group of 67 nursing homes averaging 2.7 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tays, Antonio | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 10/01/2022 | |
| Apolinar, Adam | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/23/2015 | |
| Contreras, Terri | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/29/2019 | |
| Elliott, Benjamin | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/13/2016 | |
| Faglie, Kelly | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/31/2017 | |
| Gaitonde, Gajanan | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/28/2006 | |
| Gonzales, Hector | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/27/2001 | |
| Gutierrez, Monica | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/13/2016 | |
| Kessler, William | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/27/1973 | |
| Zamora, Raul | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/30/1980 | |
| Ledet, Danrick | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2022 | |
| Csv Rhea Management Holdco, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2022 | |
| Dwd Tx Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2022 | |
| Jack and Nancy Dwyer Workforce Development Center Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2022 | |
| Reg Leased Opco LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2022 | |
| Reg Operator Holdco LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2022 | |
| Regency IHS Clinical Consulting, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2022 | |
| Regency IHS of South Laredo LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2022 | |
| Regency IHS Rehab LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2025 | |
| Regency Integrated Health Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/17/2025 | |
| Regency Texas Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2022 | |
| Uvalde County Hospital Authority | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/17/2025 | |
| Casas, Carlos | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2026 | |
| Leal, Olivia | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2022 | |
| Ledet, Danrick | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2022 | |
| Tays, Antonio | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2022 |
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.