2817 Kent Street, Bryan, TX 77802 · Brazos County · (979) 776-7521
117 certified beds, about 100 residents a day · Government - Hospital district · Medicare and Medicaid since 1969
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 455351 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 9, 2026, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 40 health citations since December 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $8,044 in the last three years; the largest was $8,044, and the latest is dated January 15, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.00 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.23 of those hours.
46.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Legacy Nursing & Rehabilitation, an affiliated group of 11 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 40 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to use the services of a registered nurse for at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week for 10 of 89 days reviewed for RN coverage. The facility failed to ensure they had an RN on duty on [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], and [DATE]. This failure placed residents at risk of missed nursing assessments, interventions, care, and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan that describes the services that are to be furnished to maintain the residents' highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 9 residents reviewed for care plans (Resident #9, Resident #53 and Resident #99). 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #9's comprehensive care plan reflected a plan for her indwelling urinary catheter that included her physician ordered interventions dated 07/02/2026 Urethral catheter (20 Fr) with (30 cc) bulb. every shift Urinary catheter and catheter bag: Tubing secure; Check for placement of dignity cover; Ensure bag is below the level of the bladder; Ensure bag is not touching or dragging the floor/ground. 2. [...]
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 two of eight residents (Resident # 7, Resident #12 and Resident # 68) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7, Resident #12 and Resident #68's nails were clean on 07/07/2026. This failure could place residents at risk for poor hygiene, dignity issues, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed. The[KS33.1] facility failed to ensure food safety by not discarding expired food in the kitchen, not maintaining a sanitary kitchen, and not implementing infection control when taking food temperatures. These failures can place residents at risk for foodborne illness. An Observation on 7/7/2026 at 9:00 AM of the walk-in cooler revealed the following. A opened container of Grape Jelly , , had an open date of 7/5/2026 and no use-by date. Flour Tortillas with the production date of 11/07/2025 with no use-by date. Opened yogurt in a sealed bag with an open date of 6/13/2026 with no use-by date. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the residents received services with reasonable accommodation of resident's needs and preferences, except when to do so would endanger the health and safety of the resident or other residents, for 2 of 26 residents (Residents #20 and #80) reviewed for call light accessibility. The[KS46.1] facility failed to ensure the call light system was accessible to Residents #20, and #80. This failure could place residents at risk of not being able to call for staff assistance to meet care needs, This could put the residents at risk of injury or pain. Record review of Resident #20's Face sheet dated 07/09/2026 indicated that the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure all Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level I residents with a mental illness was completed correctly and were provided with a PASRR Level II assessment for one (Resident #62) of 4 residents reviewed for PASRR assessments. The facility failed to ensure the Social Worker entered Resident #62's PASRR Level l correctly into SimpleLTC portal (portal used by nursing facilities to manage resident's information). The PASRR entered did not indicate a diagnosis of mental illness, although diagnosis of major depressive disorder was present upon admission on [DATE]. This failure could place all residents who had a mental illness at risk for not receiving needed assessment (PASRR Evaluation), individualized care, and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained free of accidents hazards as was possible for one of three housekeeping carts (Housekeeping Cart #1) reviewed for hazards. The facility failed to ensure Housekeeping Cart #1, with chemicals inside the compartments, was locked when unsupervised on 07/07/2026 This failure could place residents at risk for injuries, illness, and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for two of three residents reviewed for quality of care (Resident #9 and Resident #53). 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #9's foley catheter was secured on 07/7/2026.2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #53's foley catheter collection bag was not at or below the level of the bladder o at 3 observed times on 7/7/2026, 7/8/2026 and 7/9/2026. These failures to place residents with urinary catheters at risk for traumatic removal and catheter acquired infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with State and Federal laws, all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to 1 of 4 medication carts (Medication Cart #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Medication Cart #1, was locked, medications secured, and not accessible to other staff, residents, or visitors on 07/07/2026. This failure could place residents at risk of having unauthorized access to medications, decreased effectiveness of medication, or missing medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure results of the most recent survey of the facility conducted by Federal or State surveyors and any plan of correction in effect with respect to survey were readily available to examine for 1 of 1 facility in that:1. The results of the most recent survey were not posted in a location readily accessible to all residents, their legal representatives, or family members as required.2. The facility failed to maintain the survey binder; the binder failed to include 3 previous years of required state visit results from 1/07/23, 3/29/24, 5/8/25 and recent visits 1/15/26 and 02/05/226. This failure placed residents of the facility at risk of not knowing past and present citations of the facility and potentially being negatively affected by an area of citation.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan that describes the services that are to be furnished to maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for one resident (Resident #1) of 9 reviewed, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan reflected a plan of care for all of her fall interventions. Resident #1 was ordered to have a Geri-chair or tilt back wheelchair on 04/17/2026 after she experienced a fall on 04/16/2026 her care plan was not updated to include the intervention of the Geri-chair. This failure could place residents with falls at risk for injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan that included instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the residents, for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan was completed within 48 hours of admission that addressed the care needs of newly admitted Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were trauma survivors receive culturally competent, trauma-informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice and accounting for residents' experiences and preferences in order to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident for 1 resident (Resident #2) of 9 residents reviewed for trauma-informed care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 had a trauma screening that identified possible triggers when Resident #2 had a history of trauma. This failure could place residents at an increased risk for psychological distress due to re-traumatization and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #1 received sufficient supervision to avoid the right femur fracture and subsequent hospitalization on 01/11/26. This failure could place the residents at risk for accidents.
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 3 out of 5 residents reviewed for pharmacy services, in that: The facility failed to administer medications within the required timeframe for 3 residents (Resident #1, Resident #2 and Resident #3) of 5 residents resulting in late medication administration. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of the medications and supplements, could result in worsening or exacerbation of chronic medical conditions, and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 (Resident #5) out of 5 residents reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to clean up blood splatters on the floor of Resident #5's room after IV therapy. These failures placed residents at risk of transmission and/or spread of blood borne pathogens including infections or contagious diseases which could lead to infections and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to incorporate the recommendations from the PASRR level II determination and the PASRR evaluation report into a resident's assessment, care planning and transitions of care for one of four residents (Resident #1)reviewed for PASRR services . The facility failed to submit a NFSS request form for PASRR Specialized Services within 20 business days after PASRR Comprehensive Service IDT Meeting on 12/23/2024. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving needed individualized care, and specialized services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for two (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of four resident reviewed for catheters. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had catheter care orders from 04/02/2025 to 05/07/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 had catheter care orders from 05/09/2025 to 05/13/2025. These failures could place residents who required incontinent care at risk for development of new or worsening urinary tract infections or pain.
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 the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #48) reviewed for ADL's. The facility failed to ensure assistance was provided for repositioning and incontinent care every 2 hours for Resident #48 when he was observed to be left in his Geri-chair on 05/05/2025 from 7:00 AM until 4:00 PM. (9 hours). This failure could place residents at risk of not being provided care and assistance when needed. Findings Included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure pain management was provided to residents who required such services consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 2 of 3 (Resident #150, and Residents #85) residents reviewed for pain management. A) The facility failed to ensure Resident #150 effective pain management by not evaluating effectiveness of current pain medications and not having her current pain medications available for administration. B) The facility failed to ensure that Resident #85 received at least daily assessments of pain for 34 of 49 days. This failure could place resident at risk for increased pain causing undo suffering.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to prepare food by methods that conserve nutritive value for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to ensure Dietary [NAME] K refrained from adding an unmeasured amount of liquid from cooked carrots to puréed carrots during meal service on 5/6/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Dietary [NAME] K refrained from adding an unmeasured amount of pan juices to puréed roast during meal service on 5/6/2025. This failure had the potential to affect all residents who received puréed diets prepared in the facility's kitchen, placing those residents at risk for diminished or altered nutritional status and potential weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to properly store, prepare, distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen. 1. The facility failed to label and date all food items located in the walk-in refrigerator and in the dry food pantry area on 5/5/2025, 5/6/2025, and 5/7/2025. 2. The facility failed to discard expired food items located in the walk-in refrigerator and in the dry food pantry area. 3. The facility failed to clean and sanitize its cooking equipment, including the deep fryer and two ovens. 4. The facility failed to ensure that dietary staff wore hair restraints (e.g. beard restraints) to prevent hair from contacting food, per current Food Code. These failures could place residents who received meals from the kitchen at risk of foodborne illnesses.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan that included instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident, for one of four residents (Resident #150) reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan was completed within 48 hours of admission that addressed the care needs of newly admitted Resident #150. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan that describes the services that are to be furnished to maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 18 residents (Resident #48), in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #48's comprehensive care plan reflected a plan of care for his left hand and neck contractures (A permanent tightening of the muscles, tendons, skin, and surrounding tissues that causes the joints to shorten and stiffen and a decrease in ROM). This failure could place residents at risk for not having care needs identified and a plan to address those needs developed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to review and update care plan for one of twelve residents (Resident #84) reviewed for care plans timing and revision. The facility failed to ensure that care plan was updated and revised with safety interventions appropriate to resident's cognitive status for Resident #84 after falls on 4/28/2025 and 5/3/2025. These failures could place residents at risk of not having their medical, nursing, and mental needs met, and of not having their safety needs addressed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure 1of 4 residents reviewed with limited range of motion (Resident 48), received appropriate treatment and services to prevent a decrease in range of motion. The facility failed to ensure Resident #48 had interventions in place for his right- hand contracture and neck contracture (A permanent tightening of the muscles, tendons, skin, and surrounding tissues that causes the joints to shorten and stiffen and a decrease in ROM) to prevent further decline of the range of motion in his right hand and neck. This deficient practice placed residents with contractures at risk for decrease in mobility, range of motion, and could contribute to worsening of contractures. Findings Include: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for one (Resident #84) of twelve residents reviewed for fall interventions. The facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents and develop effective interventions to prevent accidents for Resident #84 after falls on 2/8/2025, 4/28/2025, and 5/3/2025. These failures could place residents at risk of repeated falls with major injury and/or fracture.
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 drug and biological) to meet the needs of each resident for 1of 5 residents (Resident #150) reviewed for medications and pharmacy services, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #150 physician ordered medication Fentanyl was available for administration. These deficient practices could place residents at risk of not receiving therapeutic dosage of medications and symptomatic changes in vital signs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure it was free of a medication error rate of 5% or greater. There were four (4) medication errors in 35 opportunities for an error rate of 11.43% by 1 of 3 staff members observed (LVN C) administering medications to 1 of 7 residents. (Resident #35). Resident #35 was administered 325 mg Aspirin, crushed via PEG tube. Order stated 81 mg Chewable Aspirin, administered by mouth. Medication was administered with the incorrect dose and route of administration. Resident #35 failed to receive adequate physical assessment per the accepted standards and principles which apply to professionals, including vital signs for blood pressure and pulse, prior to receiving medications for lowering blood pressure. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure expired and/or discontinued medications were removed from use for one of two medication storage rooms in the facility. The facility failed to ensure expired and/or discontinued medications were removed from use for one medication storage room. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefits of their medications.
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 and follow accepted national standards for two of three residents reviewed for infection control practices. (Resident #5 and Resident #35). The facility failed to ensure that LVN C, LVN E, and Hospice RN P followed Enhanced Barrier Precautions when providing care and use of invasive lines for Resident #5 with medication administration through a PEG tube and for Resident #35 during urinary catheter bag change. These failures could place the residents at risk for developing infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen and food sanitation. 1. The facility failed to label and date all food items located in the refrigerators and freezer. 2. The facility failed to ensure damaged or dented canned food items were kept in a separate designated area and not used. 3. The facility failed to ensure kitchen staff practiced proper hand hygiene and glove use when preparing food. 4. The facility failed to ensure kitchen staff cleaned and sanitized the blender in between pureed food items. 5. The facility failed to ensure staff used proper hygienic practice when handling food and feeding a resident. 6. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations listed in the findings, the facility failed to ensure all Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level I Screening for residents diagnosed with mental illness were accurate and residents were provided with a PASARR Level II Screening for 2 of 2 resident's (Resident #42 and Resident #55) reviewed for PASARR coordination. The facility failed to ensure Resident #42-Level 1 screening dated 10/05/2020 - listed no and Resident #55 PASARR-Level 1 screening dated 11/01/2022 - listed no PASARR Level 2 evaluation. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving necessary mental health services, causing a decline in mental health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews , and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident received and the facility provided food and drink that was palatable, attractive and at a safe and appetizing temperature for residents who consumed foods orally from the only kitchen in the facility in that: 1. The kitchen test tray of the lunch meal foods was burnt, inedible, and unappealing. 2. The facility failed to provide palatable food that was attractive or appetizing to residents' who complained the food did not look or taste good. This failure could place residents at risk of decreased food intake, hunger, unwanted weight loss, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to assess each resident quarterly using the Minimum Data Set form specified by the state and approved by CMS for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #57) reviewed for quarterly assessments, in that: The facility failed to ensure a quarterly MDS assessment was completed within 92 days of the previous quarterly assessment for Resident #55. The quarterly MDS Assessment was required to be completed, signed and transmitted by the due date of 02/28/2024. It was signed and completed on 03/29/2024. This failure could place residents at risk for not having their needs met in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one resident (Resident #94) of eight reviewed, in that: A) The facility failed to ensure Resident #94's Comprehensive Care Plan reflected a revision for his isolation precautions related to MRSA (Methicillin Resistant staphylococcus aureus) and his current skin condition. B) The facility failed to ensure Resident #46's Comprehensive Care Plan reflected his use of a indwelling urinary catheter. This failure could place a resident at risk for errors in provider care, poor wound healing/worsening wound condition, and the potential spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for two of six residents reviewed for catheter care (Resident #4 and Resident #46). A) The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's had a plan of care for her catheter, that it was secured to her body with a catheter secure device and failed to monitor her catheter care per the facility policy. B) The facility failed to ensure Resident #46's catheter was ordered by a physician, had a plan of care and was secured to his body with a catheter secure device per the facility policy. This failure to secure catheters placed residents with urinary catheters at risk for traumatic removal and catheter acquired infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the safe handling, humidification, cleaning, storage, and dispensing of oxygen for respiratory care services provided to 3 of 3 residents (Resident 35, 53, and 56) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Residents oxygen tubing was dated to ensure it was changed weekly for 3 residents (Resident 35, 53, and 56) as ordered by the physician and as verbally reported to be the facility policy by DON. The facility failed to have a written policy to ensure the safe handling, humidification, cleaning, storage, and dispensing of oxygen on 03/29/2024 at 10:10 a.m. A policy is required per guidelines. The facility failed to ensure that the Oxygen setting matched the physicians order for 1 of the 3 residents. Oxygen set at 4 Liters per minute instead of the 3 Liters per minute ordered. [...]
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 of transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 3 of 3 resident reviewed (Resident #24, #52, and #5) for infection control. The facility failed to ensure MA-F performed proper hand hygiene and failed to ensure MA sanitized equipment for infection control during 03/28/2024 medication pass for Residents #24, #52 and #5. This failure placed residents at risk for development of communicable diseases and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury for 1 of 3 residents (Resident # 1) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse of CNA A slapped Resident #1 on 10/18/2023 was reported to the state survey agency within two hours after the administrator was informed of the alleged abused. This failure could place residents at risk of emotional, physical and mental abuse and neglect.
1 fire safety citation on file: 1 on May 8, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| January 15, 2026 | Fine | $8,044 |
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) | 3.00 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.23 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.56 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.99 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.78 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 46.8% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 60.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.06 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 3.18 on weekdays and 2.56 on weekends, 19% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 5.9% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.53 in April to June 2025 to 3.00 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 | 3.00 | 0.23 | 3.18 | 2.56 | 5.9% | 0 of 90 | 100 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.54 | 0.31 | 3.76 | 2.98 | 10.1% | 0 of 92 | 99 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.34 | 0.19 | 3.49 | 2.96 | 8.1% | 0 of 92 | 97 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.53 | 0.21 | 3.69 | 3.14 | 20.3% | 0 of 91 | 97 |
| 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 | 15.6 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.0 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.5 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.0 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.3 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 7.1 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Legacy Nursing and Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (38.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
38.7% 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. 133 eligible stays.
12.9% 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. 166 eligible stays.
6.6% 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. 102 eligible stays.
44.9% this home
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. 69 residents counted.
1.2% 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. 86 residents counted.
3.4% 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. 86 residents counted.
93.5% this home
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. 31 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: ANSON HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Legacy Nursing & Rehabilitation, a group of 11 nursing homes averaging 1.5 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bryan Propco, L.L.C. | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Vdg LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Clark, Justa | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Haynes, Billie | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2016 | |
| Spraberry, David | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2016 | |
| Klein, Pete | Corporate director | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Lytle, Larry | Corporate director | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Shaw, Max | Corporate director | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Wilson, Teri | Corporate director | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Clark, Justa | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Haynes, Billie | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Spraberry, David | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Vest, Barbara | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Anson Hospital District | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Bryan Opco LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Dymock, Mathew | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/03/2025 | |
| Gum, Victor | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Stone, Diana | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Bryan Opco LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Bryan Propco, L.L.C. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/24/2025 | |
| Dgprejean, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Jdgum, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| LP Holdings, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Mylesh, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Dymock, Mathew | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Gum, Victor | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Holyfield, Myles | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Stone, Diana | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/01/2025 |
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.