805 Harrison St., Matador, TX 79244 · Motley County · (806) 347-1000
50 certified beds, about 25 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2015
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676389 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on December 3, 2025, inspectors cited 4 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
None of its 30 health citations since June 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.77 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.51 of those hours.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 30 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure PRN orders for anti-psychotic drugs were limited to 14 days unless the attending physician or prescribing practitioner evaluates the resident beyond 14 days for one (Resident #2) of three residents reviewed for freedom of abuse, in that:The facility failed to stop a psychotropic medication, Lorazepam (an anti-anxiety medication), which was ordered for Resident #2 to be administered PRN after 14 days without the physician's authorization. Resident #2 was administered 12 additional doses without a physician's order. The deficient practice placed residents at risk of being chemically restrained, sedated, and altered mental status.
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 food service safety.1. The facility failed to ensure food was properly stored, labeled and dated.2. The facility failed to discard expired food items. These failures could place residents at risk of foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights and that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 (Resident #24) of 12 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to include Resident #24's AVAPS machine in her care plan. This failure could lead to residents not receiving needed care and/or receiving improper care/treatment. Findings Included:Record review of Resident #24's admission record dated 09/24/25 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, but were not limited to, heart failure and respiratory failure. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #8) of 12 residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8 received O2 via NC at the rate of 2-3 lpm as ordered by her physician. This failure could place residents who receive oxygen at an increased risk of hypercapnia (too much carbon dioxide in the blood), pulmonary oxygen toxicity (damage to the lung lining tissues and air sacs), hypoxemia (low levels of oxygen in the blood, decreasing the oxygen supply to vital organs), and shortness of breath. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review; it was determined the facility failed to ensure that in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, the facility must maintain medical records on each resident that are complete, accurately documented, and readily accessible for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for clinical records (Resident #1) in that: The facility failed to conduct a fall risk assessment for Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk of increased falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services to include the accurate dispensing and administering of drugs to meet the needs for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for physician orders. The facility failed to accurately enter physician orders for Seroquel(anti-psychotic medication) and Trazodone(insomnia medication) for Resident #1. The deficient practice could place residents at risk of not receiving medications as prescribed and/or deterioration in their condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with appropriate competencies and skill sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service for the facility's only kitchen reviewed for dietary services. The facility failed to ensure the designated Dietary Manager completed the required dietary managers certification course or had any other qualifying credentials. This failure could place residents at risk for the spread of foodborne illness and residents not having their nutritional needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the meals served reflected the nutritional needs of residents in accordance with established national guidelines for all residents when the facility failed to ensure menus were followed all residents for 1 of 2 meals observed. 1. The facility did not serve a biscuit or any bread products to any residents for the lunch meal on 8/12/24 as directed by the menu. These failures could place all residents who received food from the kitchen, at risk for decreased meal satisfaction, potential weight loss due to poor meal intake, not having their nutritional needs met, and a decline in health status
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food under sanitary conditions in 1 of 1 kitchen when they failed to: A. Ensure stored food was properly labeled, dated, and contained. B. Ensure general cleanliness was maintained. C. Ensure all food service staff used proper hand hygiene and use of gloves during meal preparation. D. Ensure temperatures were taken at the beginning of the meal service. E. Ensure substitution list, cleaning list and temperature logs were utilized. These failures placed all residents who ate food served by the kitchen at risk of cross contamination and food-borne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to conduct a periodic comprehensive assessment of each resident's functional capacity for 3 of 14 residents (Residents #7, #9, and #20) whose records were reviewed for assessments. The facility failed to complete a comprehensive assessments for Resident #7, #9, and #20 every 3 months. This failure could place residents at risk for not getting an accurate assessment and could result in lack of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to review the risks and benefits of bed rails with the resident or resident's representative and obtain informed consent prior to installation of bed rails for 4 (Residents #5, #13, #24, and #25) of 14 residents reviewed for bedrails. The facility failed to inform Residents #5, #13, #24, and #25 or their representatives of the use of bed rails and obtain consent for the use of bed rails. This failure could place all residents with bed rails at risk for injuries such as abrasion, fractures, and entrapment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to use the services of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 18 days out of 31 (05/28/23, 06/03/23, 06/04/23, 06/10/23, 06/11/23, 06/17/23, 06/18/23,06/24/23) 07/6/24, 07/13/24, 07/20/24, 07/21/24, 08/03/24, 8/10/24 and 8/11/24 ) days reviewed for RN coverage. The facility failed to ensure they had RN coverage 8 hours a day, 7 days a week for the following days: 05/4/24, 05/5/24, 05/11/24, 05/18/24, 05/19/24, 05/25/24, 05/26/24, 06/23/24, 06/29/24, 06/30/24, 07/04/24, 07/6/24, 07/13/24, 07/20/24, 07/21/24, 08/03/24, 8/10/24 and 8/11/24. This failure could place residents at risk for inconsistency in care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to conduct a comprehensive and accurate assessment of each resident using the resident assessment instrument (RAI) specified by CMS for 1 of 14 residents (Resident #31) whose records were reviewed for assessments. Resident #31 was on CPAP therapy while in the facility and it was not addressed in his MDS. This failure to ensure comprehensive and accurate assessments could affect residents by placing them at risk for not receiving correct care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to perform preadmission screening for individuals with a mental disorder and individuals with intellectual disability prior to admission for 2 (Resident #18 and #20) of 16 residents reviewed for preadmission screenings. A. The facility failed to perform a PASRR for Resident #18 until 4 months after admission. B. The facility failed to perform a PASRR for Resident #20 until 2 months after admission. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate care. Findings Included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs for 1 (Resident #31) of 14 Residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. -The facility failed to include a care plan for Resident #31's smoking. This failure could affect residents in the facility receiving care per comprehensive person-centered care plans resulting in resident not being able to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review; the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles when applicable on 1 (Hall 100 and half of Hall 300) of 2 medication carts reviewed. Two Loose pills found in the medication drawers of the medication cart for Hall 100 and half of Hall 300. This failure could result in residents not receiving an accurate dose of medication as well as not being maintained at their best therapeutic level.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infection in 1 of 1 dining rooms. -CNA C failed to perform hand hygiene before assisting Resident #32 with eating. This failure had the potential to affects residents in the facility by exposing them to care that could lead to the spread of viral infections, secondary infections, communicable diseases, and feelings of isolation related to poor hygiene.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to use the services of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 8 out of 30 (05/28/23, 06/03/23, 06/04/23, 06/10/23, 06/11/23, 06/17/23, 06/18/23, and 06/24/23) days reviewed for RN coverage. The facility failed to ensure they had RN coverage 8 hours a day, 7 days a week for the following days: 05/28/23, 06/03/23, 06/04/23, 06/10/23, 06/11/23, 06/17/23, 06/18/23, and 06/24/23 This failure could place residents at risk for inconsistency in care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with appropriate competencies and skill sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service for thefacility's only kitchen reviewed for dietary services. The facility failed to ensure the designated Dietary Manager completed the required dietary managers certification course or had any other qualifying credentials. This failure could place residents at risk for the spread of foodborne illness and residents not having their nutritional needs met.
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 in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary services, in that: 1) The facility failed to ensure Dietary staff used pasteurized eggs in under cooked egg dishes (soft cooked/sunny side up/over easy eggs), 2) The facility failed to ensure Dietary staff stored foods in a manner to prevent contamination, 3) The facility failed to ensure Dietary staff maintained adequate chlorine sanitizer levels in the low temperature dish machine. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to be adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relayed the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area from each resident's bedside for 4 of 14 resident rooms (102, 205, 207, and 301); in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure that the resident call system at bedside could not be cancelled from the nurse's station (Rooms 102, 205, 207, and 301). 2. The facility further failed to ensure that the call system accurately indicated the location of the registered call (rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]). These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving needed services.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to send and receive mail promptly on Saturdays, in that: Resident mail was delivered and available at the facility's US Post Office mailbox on Saturday's but was not delivered to residents until Monday. This failure could place residents at risk for a decline in their psychosocial well-being and not receiving important mail in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure all Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level I residents with mental illness were provided with a PASRR Evaluation assessment for 4 of 13 residents (Residents #4, #6, #7, #13) reviewed for PASRR screening, in that: Resident #4 did not have an accurate PASRR Level 1 assessment when she had a diagnosis of unspecified psychosis. Resident #6 did not have an accurate PASRR Level 1 assessment when she had a diagnosis of major depressive disorder. Resident #7 did not have an accurate PASRR Level 1 assessment when she had a diagnosis of major depressive disorder. Resident #13 did not have an accurate PASRR Level 1 assessment when she had a diagnosis of major depressive disorder. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the menu was followed and reviewed by the facility's dietitian or other clinically qualified nutrition professional for nutritional adequacy for residents, for (Residents #5, 12, 17 and 26), in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure residents received consistent serving sizes as called for on the menu and approved by the Dietician during 2 meal observations. 2. The facility failed to ensure diet guidance for all diets ordered was represented on the diet spreadsheet and had Dietician approval. These failures could place residents at risk for unwanted weight loss, hunger, unwanted weight gain, and metabolic imbalances.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents had the right to formulate an advance directive for 3 of 13 residents (Residents #3, #7, and #18) reviewed for advanced directives, in that: Residents #3, #7 and #18 were listed as a DNR but had a OOH-DNR forms that were incorrectly filled out or missing required information. These failures 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 for 1 of 13 residents (Residents #19) reviewed for care plans as follows: Resident #19 did not have a care plan for ADL Functional/Rehabilitation Potential. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the care required to meet their Individualized needs.
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 1 of 1 resident with a urinary catheter (Resident #27); in that: The facility failed to ensure catheter related physician's orders were followed and failed to position the catheter drainage bag and tubing in a manner that promoted gravity flow and prevented infections. These failures could place residents at risk for urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to offer, based on a resident's comprehensive assessment, a therapeutic diet when there was a nutritional problem, and the health care provider ordered a therapeutic diet for 1 of 1 resident (Residents #5) on a therapeutic diet, in that: The facility failed to provide Residents #5 with her physician ordered 2g sodium therapeutic diet for 3 of 3 meals (6/25/23 Supper and 6/26/23 - Lunch and Supper). The Dietary staff were not aware of the diet and were serving the resident foods that were high in sodium. This failure could place residents at risk for hunger, weight loss, and chemical imbalances.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure, based on a comprehensive assessment, 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 blank of blank residents on psychoactive medication's (Resident #1), in that: The facility failed to ensure that Resident #1 had orders for psychotropic medications (lorazepam (brand name Ativan)) that did not contain PRN orders beyond 14 days without a start date and reassessment. This failure could place residents at risk for receiving unnecessary medications and adverse drug reactions.
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 2 of 2 meals observe for 2 of 2 residents with orders for puréed diet (Residents #1 and 24); in that: The facility failed to provide food that was in a form to meet resident needs, 2 of 2 meals observed (6/26/23 - Lunch and Supper) for 2 of 2 residents with the orders for puréed diets (Residents #1 and 24). This failure could place residence at risk of decreased food intake and choking.
1 fire safety citation on file: 1 on August 14, 2024.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Texas | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.77 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.51 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 4.09 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.64 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.63 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.41 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 5.04 on weekdays and 4.09 on weekends, 19% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 5.4% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.10 in April to June 2025 to 4.77 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 | 4.77 | 0.51 | 5.04 | 4.09 | 5.4% | 0 of 90 | 25 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.62 | 0.37 | 4.81 | 4.13 | 9.5% | 0 of 92 | 30 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.41 | 0.39 | 4.69 | 3.71 | 4.1% | 0 of 92 | 31 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.10 | 0.43 | 4.37 | 3.42 | 3.0% | 0 of 91 | 30 |
| 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.
Trains nurse aides: this home runs a state-approved CNA program (state list: HHSC Approved NATCEP Providers, as of October 6, 2026). A nursing home cannot charge aides it employs, or has offered a job, for state-approved training (42 CFR 483.152(c)). See Matador Nursing and Rehabilitation CNA training on CareerFunded, our sister site for career training.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.03 | $16.97 to $20.71 | 88,680 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.92 | $27.46 to $32.89 | 57,560 |
| Registered nurses | $46.14 | $38.06 to $50.53 | 271,380 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Texas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 33.7 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.6 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 29.7 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.1 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 27.3 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 4.7 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.9 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Matador Health and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 51.5% · Texas: 116 better, 50 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 16 eligible stays.
9.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Texas: 0 better, 9 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 32 eligible stays.
6.7% 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. 25 eligible stays.
45.0% 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. 20 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Texas0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 30 residents counted.
4.5% 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. 30 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. 4 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: CHILDRESS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Childress County Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/01/2018 |
| Jg SNF Realty, LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 06/22/2022 | |
| Neal, Joseph | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 06/22/2022 | |
| Whitten, Gregory | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 06/22/2022 | |
| Holcomb, Holly | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/29/2021 | |
| Stratton, Emilee | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/18/2018 | |
| Matador Senior Care LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 06/22/2022 | |
| Neal, Joseph | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/22/2022 | |
| Jg SNF Realty, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/22/2022 | |
| Matador Senior Care LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/21/2025 | |
| Alley, Steve | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/22/2022 | |
| Moeller, Jordan | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/13/2023 | |
| Neal, Joseph | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/22/2022 | |
| Whitten, Gregory | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/22/2022 |
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.