601 N Mile 2 West, Mercedes, TX 78570 · Hidalgo County · (956) 294-1689
123 certified beds, about 79 residents a day · Government - Hospital district · Medicare and Medicaid since 2017
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676414 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 9, 2026, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 32 health citations since October 2023, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (4 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $16,611 in the last three years; the largest was $8,330, and the latest is dated December 23, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.32 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.23 of those hours.
45.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Touchstone Communities, an affiliated group of 25 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 32 health citations on file.
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 that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for care plans, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan dated 11/20/17 reflected her Enhanced Barrier precautions due to pressure injury to left gluteus. This failure could place residents in the facility at risk of not being provided with the necessary care or services and not having personalized plans developed to address their specific needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 (wound care cart) of 7 medication carts. The facility failed to ensure that the wound care cart was secured and locked when it was left unattended by LVN B. This failure could place residents at risk of injury to other residents if medication left unsecured were consumed.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain clinical records that were complete and accurate in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) whose clinical records were reviewed for accuracy, in that: 1. The facility failed to have a physician order for the Enhanced Barrier Precautions for Resident #1.2. The facility failed to document in Resident #2's medical record when Resident #2 got orders for Moisture-Associated Skin Damage. This failure could affect residents whose records are maintained by the facility and could place them at risk for errors in care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program, designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections, for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure LVN A performed proper hand hygiene for at least 20 seconds during wound care for Resident #1 on 07/28/26. This failure could place residents at risk of infections, healthcare associated with cross contamination, and the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 3 residents (Residents #1), reviewed for pharmaceutical services, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's physician was notified when his blood sugar levels were over 300, per physician's orders. This failure could place residents at risk delayed medication adjustments.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of any significant medication errors for 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #7) of 5 residents reviewed for medication errors. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN A did not administer Resident #1's morning dose of IV Vancomycin (an antibiotic) before obtaining a Vancomycin trough (blood is collected and sent to the laboratory to determine if the Resident's Vancomycin level is therapeutic, too high, or too low) level on 04/08/26. 2. [...]
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 1 of 4 residents (Residents #6), reviewed for pharmaceutical services, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #6's physician's ordered Midodrine was correct. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving medication as ordered.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure its medication error rate was not five percent or greater. The medication error rate was 8.11% based on 3 errors out of 37 opportunities for 1 (Resident #7) of 5 residents observed for medication administration. The facility failed to ensure MA D administered Resident #7's 3 anti-hypertensive medications (Amlodipine Besylate, Carvedilol, and Losartan Potassium) when her blood pressure was within parameters for administration per the physician's orders. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving the intended therapeutic effects of their medications and could contribute to possible adverse reactions.
Inspectors wroteNumber of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to enact a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors to ensure safe and sanitary storage, handling and consumption for 1 (Resident #43) of 3 resident refrigerators reviewed for refrigerator sanitation. The facility failed to ensure Resident #43's personal refrigerator was maintained. Resident #43's personal refrigerator had 3 small individual cups of pudding that were expired as well as a half-eaten carrot cupcake that did not have an open or expiration date. This failure could place residents who store food items in resident refrigerators, at risk of cross-contamination and food-borne illnesses if consumed.
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 infections for two (Resident #14 and Resident #82) of 6 residents reviewed for infection control practices. 1. The facility failed to ensure MA D performed hand hygiene for at least 20 seconds before she administered Resident #14's medication.2. The facility failed to ensure MA D performed hand hygiene for at least 20 seconds before and after she administered Resident #82's medication. This failure could place residents at risk for healthcare associated cross-contamination and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident had the right to access personal and medical records pertaining to himself or herself within 24 hours and allow the resident to obtain a copy of the records or any portions thereof upon request for 1of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to provide a copy of Resident #1's medical records to Resident #1's RP after requesting the records on 10/15/25. This failure could place residents at risk of not having access to records when requested.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's behavior of removal of nasal cannula and non-compliance with oxygen was care planned. This deficient practice could place residents at an increased risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to formulate an advance directive for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for Advance Directives. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's OOH-DNR was completed. The OOH-DNR form did not have the physician's signature. This failure could affect all residents who have implemented Advance Directives and established their choice not to be resuscitated at risk of receiving CPR against their wishes.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure parenteral care and services were administered consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for intravenous fluids. (Resident #1) The facility failed on 12/29/2025 to ensure the dressing on Resident #1's peripheral intravenous line (a short flexible tube inserted into the vein to administer fluids and medications) was dated and initialed. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate IV care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permit only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medication storage. The facility did not ensure a medication named Normal Saline flush was not stored at the bedside for Resident #1 on 12/29/2025. This failure could place all residents at risk of misuse of medication and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received the appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for one of two (Resident#2) residents reviewed for catheter care. The facility failed to ensure CNA A used the proper wiping technique when providing perineal/in continent care to Resident #2. CNA A reused wipes when cleaning the urethral opening of Resident #2's penis and provided incontinence care with Resident #2 standing. This deficient practice could place residents with catheters at risk of infection and decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility did not include Resident #1's pruritis (itchy skin) and behavior of itching and scratching on care plan. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving appropriate treatment and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medical records accuracy, in that: The facility failed to document Resident #1's physician ordered weekly total body skin assessment. This deficient practice could affect residents whose records are maintained by the facility and could place them at risk for errors in care, and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records on each resident that were complete and accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 1 (Resident #1) of 2 residents by 4 of 4 nurses (LVN B, LVN D, LVN E, and LVN F) reviewed for accuracy and completeness of clinical records. The facility failed to ensure LVN B, LVN D, LVN E, and LVN F correctly completed Resident #1's nuero checks between 05/30/24 and 06/01/24. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving nursing services by adequately trained nurses and could result in a decline in health.
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 the resident rights 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 and described the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 (Resident #187) of 8 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to include oxygen treatment in Resident #187's comprehensive care plan. This deficient practice could affect residents who received oxygen and could result in residents receiving incorrect or inadequate oxygen support and could result in a decline in health. Findings Included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, 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 for 2 of 18 (Resident #187, Resident #78) residents reviewed for respiratory care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #187 had an oxygen sign posted on their door to alert everyone that they were on oxygen and failed to obtain a physician's order prior to providing oxygen therapy for Resident #187. 2. The facility failed to obtain a physician's order prior to providing oxygen therapy for Resident #78. This deficient practice could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk for developing respiratory complications, make others unaware oxygen was in use, and of receiving inappropriate and inadequate care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standard or food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food service safety. The facility failed to ensure all food items were labeled and dated in the freezer, and a bag of French toast was open to air and was unlabeled and undated. This failure could place residents at risk of foodborne illnesses.
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 to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 8 residents (Residents #3 and #81) reviewed for infection control in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN C followed the Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) when she did not wear a gown while administering medication via G-tube for Resident #3. 2. The facility failed to inform visitors that Resident #81 was on contact precautions. 3. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #81 had a CONTACT precaution sign at the door. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to be free from abuse or neglect, for one of four residents (Resident #2) reviewed for neglect: LVN D and LVN R did not stop advancing the Foley catheter tubing when Resident #2 was experiencing discomfort or pain and crying /groaning out. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 12/20/2024. The Immediate Jeopardy template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 08:43 PM. While the Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 12/21/2024 at 06:05 PM. The IJ was lowered to isolated with no actual harm with a potential for more than minimal harm. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse / neglect resulting in serious injury, harm, impairment or death.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement its written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property, for 1 of 8 residents (Resident#2) reviewed for abuse and neglect, in that: The facility failed to implement their Abuse Neglect Exploitation (ANE) policy when LVN D and LVN R did not stop advancing the Foley catheter tubing when Resident #2 was experiencing pain, which resulted in hospitalization. Per region response, the facility's ANE policy was obtained. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on [DATE]. The Immediate Jeopardy template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 08:43 PM. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible and each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and supervision, in that: The facility failed to ensure R#1 received adequate supervision to prevent her from exiting the facility undetected on 03/21/2024. The non-compliance was identified as Past Non-Compliance. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) began on 03/21/2024 and ended on 03/21/2024. The facility corrected the non-compliance before the investigation began. Past Non-Compliance form sent to Administrator on 12/20/2024 at 9:59 a.m. This failure could place the residents with exit seeking behaviors at risk for injury or death.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident with a urinary catheter received appropriate treatment and services for 1 (Resident #2) of 8 Residents reviewed for catheter care, in that: The facility failed to ensure LVN D and LVN R did not stop and notify doctor when resistance was felt during Resident #2's Foley catheter change. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 12/20/2024. The Immediate Jeopardy template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 08:43 PM. While the Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 12/21/2024 at 06:05 PM. Immediate Jeopardy was lowered to isolated with no actual harm with a potential for more than minimal harm, as once Immediate Jeopardy is lowered, harm cannot exist. This failure had the potential to affect residents receiving Foley catheter change could experience injury and pain.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving neglect, were reported immediately to the State Survey Agency, not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, for 1 of 4 residents (R#1) reviewed for abuse/neglect. The facility failed to report within the allotted time frame that on 03/21/2024, R#1 exited the facility unsupervised through the front door and was found leaving the premises through the parking lot. This failure could place all residents at increased risk for potential neglect due to unreported allegations of abuse and neglect.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments for 1 of 4 residents (R#1), reviewed for comprehensive care plans in that: The facility failed to care plan R#1's wandering and exit seeking behaviors prior to 03/21/2024. This deficient practice could affect residents with comprehensive care plans and could result in missed or delayed continuity of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 4 residents (Residents #2), reviewed for pharmaceutical services, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 had his physician ordered Entresto (medication used for heart failure) available on 03/22/24. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving medication as ordered.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents have the right to request, refuse, and or discontinue treatment and to formulate an advance directive for 1 (Resident #54) of 5 residents whose records were reviewed for Out-of-Hospital Do-Not-Resuscitate Order forms in that: The Facility did not ensure Resident #54's OOH-DNR form was completed fully and correctly. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their wishes met.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 (Resident #3) of 3 residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services. The facility failed to properly administer medication to Resident #3. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic effect of their medications as ordered by physician.
5 fire safety citations on file: 4 on April 9, 2026, 1 on November 16, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| December 23, 2024 | Fine | $8,281 |
| December 23, 2024 | Fine | $8,330 |
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) | 3.32 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.23 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.00 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.06 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.03 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 45.0% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 33.3% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.47 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 3.45 on weekdays and 3.00 on weekends, 13% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 2.6% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.30 in April to June 2025 to 3.32 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 | 3.32 | 0.23 | 3.45 | 3.00 | 2.6% | 1 of 90 | 79 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.21 | 0.23 | 3.32 | 2.92 | 2.0% | 0 of 92 | 79 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.25 | 0.23 | 3.40 | 2.89 | 2.7% | 0 of 92 | 77 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.30 | 0.27 | 3.43 | 2.99 | 2.5% | 0 of 91 | 80 |
| 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 | 10.5 | 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 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 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 | 5.4 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.2 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 31.9 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.0 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Mid Valley Nursing & Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (61.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
61.0% this home
No different from 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. 61 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. 82 eligible stays.
6.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Texas: 4 better, 11 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 50 eligible stays.
41.2% 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. 34 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. 61 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 61 residents counted.
95.8% 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. 24 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 Touchstone Communities, a group of 25 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capital Funding Group, Inc. | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| International Bank of Commerce | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 04/28/2021 | |
| Apolinar, Adam | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/01/2015 | |
| Touchstone Strategies Mercedes LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| Campbell, Leslie | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2020 | |
| Carazos, Marcos | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/20/2020 | |
| Carrasco, Leticia | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/19/2020 | |
| Castillo, Lynnea | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Gilcrease, Cynthia | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Sehlke, Bryon | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Zurovec, Darrell | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Aegis Therapies, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| Alamo Advisors LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| Carvajal Pharmacy LTC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| Plante & Moran PLLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| The Bryon and Rena Sehlke Living Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| Touchstone Communities Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| Touchstone Realty - Mercedes LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| Touchstone Strategies Mercedes LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/26/2025 | |
| Trident Health Services Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2019 | |
| Campbell, Leslie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2020 | |
| Carazos, Marcos | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/20/2020 | |
| Carrasco, Leticia | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/19/2020 | |
| Castillo, Lynnea | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Fellbaum, Ernest | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Gilcrease, Cynthia | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Levine, Andrew | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Sehlke, Bryon | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Studer, Stanley | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2019 | |
| Zurovec, Darrell | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2019 |
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.