12921 Misty Willow Dr, Houston, TX 77070 · Harris County · (281) 469-7881
124 certified beds, about 90 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2010
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676251 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on December 4, 2025, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 30 health citations since June 2023, 8 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (8 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $64,093 in the last three years; the largest was $28,451, and the latest is dated March 9, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.30 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.35 of those hours.
CMS links it to The Ensign Group, an affiliated group of 344 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 30 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices based on the resident's comprehensive assessment for 1 closed record (CR #1) and 3 of 3 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to seek medical guidance or report a fall that resulted in injury, including pain, swelling and a broken femur, to CR #1 for approximately 3-days. The facility nurse failed to assess CR #1 after a fall. On 03/06/2026 at 06:38 p.m. an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified. While the IJ was removed on 03/08/2026 12:46 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality for 1 closed record (CR #1) of 4 residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to follow their fall protocols and ensured CR #1 received a nursing assessment. This failure could affect the residents who require assistance with their ADLs from facility staff by placing them at risk for social isolation, loss of dignity, and self-worth.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distributed, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure food was properly stored, labeled, and dated in the walk-in refrigerator, walk-in freezer, and dry goods pantry. The facility failed to ensure dietary staff used facial hair restraints while in the kitchen properly while food was actively being prepared. These failures placed all residents who ate food served by the kitchen at risk of cross contamination and food-borne illness. Findings Include: Observation of the walk-in refrigerator on 12/02/2025 at 8:47 AM revealed:1. One open box on bottom shelf exposing raw, in-shell eggs on trays undated2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs for 3 of 3 meals observed (lunches on 12/02/2025, 12/03/2025, and 12/04/2025) and reviewed for proper textures. The facility failed to ensure that mechanical soft foods were served at the proper texture on 12/02/2025, 12/03/2025, and 12/05/2025. This failure could affect all residents on mechanical soft texture diets by placing them at risk for choking and weight loss. Findings Included: Observation of meal service on 12/02/2025 at 12:20 PM revealed [NAME] F plating a mechanical soft meal of chicken enchiladas, Spanish rice, and refried beans. [NAME] F quickly hand-chopped the enchilada in the pan with the serving spatula before plating. The chicken in the enchiladas was originally sliced. [...]
Inspectors wroteNumber of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety for 3 (Residents #45, #73, and #89) of 8 residents reviewed for refrigerators in the rooms. The facility failed to monitor temperatures and did not put thermometers in Residents #45, #73, and #89's refrigerators. These failures could affect residents by placing them at risk for food-borne illnesses.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that resident's environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible, and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 2 (Residents #21 and #47) of 15 residents reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to ensure Residents #21 and #47 had an environment free of accident and hazards by not providing a safe shower chair that had wobbly, loose, unsteady legs. This failure affected residents by placing them at risk of slipping and falling while taking a shower.
Inspectors wroteNumber of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received parenteral fluids administered consistent with professional standards of practice and in accordance with physician orders for 1 of 1 (Resident #25) residents reviewed for peripheral intravenous care. The facility failed to ensure physician orders for Resident #25 were followed to change PICC (PICC line is a soft, flexible catheter inserted into a central vein used for prolonged antibiotic therapy) line dressing changes every 7 days as ordered. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, 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 one of five residents (Resident#71) reviewed for medication administration of insulin. LVN C failed to clean and disinfect Resident #71's skin before administering Insulin on his upper right arm on 12/02/25. This failure affected the residents by placing them at an increased and unnecessary risk of exposure to 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 the keys for one of five residents (Resident #92) reviewed for storage of medication. LVN B failed to ensure Pregabalin (control drug), Levetiracetam [seizure medication], Baclofen [pain medication] and multi vitamins were not stored at Resident #92's bedside table and failed to ensure it was secured in the medication cart or medication room when she was not at the bedside on 12/03/25. This failure could place residents at risk of medication misuse and accidental ingestion.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was free from abuse for 2 of 17 residents (CR #2, Resident #5) reviewed for abuse in that: 1. CR #1 sexually abused Resident #5 on 4/19/25 when he touched her breast.2. CR #1 sexually abused an unknown female resident on 5/21/25 when he touched her thigh.3. CR #1 sexually abuse CR #2 on 7/14/25 when he touched her breast and on 8/3/25 when he touched her breast and in between her thighs. An IJ was identified on 9/19/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 9/19/25 at 4:52pm. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse for 2 of 17 residents (CR #2, Resident #5) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to implement written policies regarding abuse prevention and protection when CR #1 sexually abused Resident #5, an unidentified female resident, and CR #2 within a 4-month period between 4/19/25 and 8/3/25. The facility failed to ensure LVN B and CNA A, with knowledge of an allegation of sexual abuse on 5/21/25, reported the abuse immediately to the Administrator. An IJ was identified on 9/19/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 9/19/25 at 4:52pm. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to have evidence that all alleged violations of sexual abuse were thoroughly investigated for 2 of 17 residents (CR #2, Resident #5) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to take steps to prevent further potential abuse and take appropriate corrective action as a result of investigation findings when CR #1 sexually abused CR #2, an unidentified female resident and Resident #5 within a 4-month period between 4/19/25 and 8/3/25. An IJ was identified on 9/19/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 9/19/25 at 4:52pm. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 1 of 17 residents (CR #1) reviewed for comprehensive care plans in that: CR #1's care plan was not revised when he sexually abused Resident #5, an unidentified resident and CR #2 and had one sexual inappropriate behavior within a 4-month period between 4/19/25 and 8/3/25. Nursing staff, including LVN B, CNA A, LVN C, CNA B, LVN D and CNA C, were unaware of interventions for CR #1 that would prevent further sexual abuse from occurring. An IJ was identified on 9/19/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 9/19/25 at 4:52pm. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform each resident of his or her visitation rights and related facility policy and procedures, including any safety restrictions or limitation on such rights, the reason for the restriction or limitation, and to whom the restrictions apply for 1 of 17 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for resident rights. Resident #2 was not informed by the facility when her family member was no longer allowed to visit due to safety restrictions after February 2025. This failure placed residents at risk of not being informed of their rights, confusion and sadness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were receiving person-centered Quality of Care for 1 residents (CR#1 ) of 8 residents reviewed. The facility failed to ensure CR #1 was properly transferred from the floor to the bed when displaying signs/symptoms of a fracture (pain, deformity, etc). CR #1 sustained a hip fracture. The facility failed to acknowledge CR#1's verbal complaint of pain by picking her up off the floor possibly causing more harm. The facility failed to follow physician orders and administer CR #1's pain medication (PRN). This failure could affect residents currently residing in the facility resulting in not receiving needed care to maintain optimum health and placing them at risk for injury and/or deterioration in their condition. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on [DATE] at 4:34 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from Accident Hazards and Supervision for 1 resident (CR#1) of 8 residents reviewed for Accident Hazards and Supervision. The facility failed to ensure each CR #1 was transferred properly after she was found face down on the floor, sustaining multiple injuries, including laceration above the eye, closed head injury and broken femur. The facility failed to acknowledge CR#1's verbal complaint of pain by picking her up off the floor possibly causing more harm. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 03/27/2025 at 4:34 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs to meet the needs of each resident for CR#1 & CR#2 of 8 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure CR #1 received his medication as ordered when WCN administered non-scheduled aspirin without an order when CR #1 had a known head injury. The facility failed to ensure CR#2 recevied his IV antibiotic medication as ordered by the physician. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 03.27.25 at 4:34 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention 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 4 Staff (CNA W) reviewed for infection control. - The facility failed to ensure CNA W followed proper hand hygiene during incontinent . - The Wound Care Nurse did not practice hand hygiene before and after wound care for Resident #20. These deficient practices could affect residents and place them at risk for infection, and reinfection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide dignity and respect for 1 of 6 (Resident #20) residents observed for dignity in that: -The facility failed to close the blinds to Resident # 20's window during Foley catheter care. This failure could place residents who require assistance with care at risk for embarrassment and lower self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident receives care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers and does not develop pressure ulcers unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrates that they were unavoidable for 1 of 6 residents (Resident # 20) reviewed for pressure sores in that: - The facility failed to off load Resident #20's heels by floating them on a pillow or by placing heel protectors on resident heels to prevent further skin breakdown. This failure affected one resident and placed him at risk of developing further skin breakdown or developing of new pressure injury.
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 one (Resident #10) of two residents reviewed for incontinence care. -The facility failed to ensure CNA W provided appropriate perineal care for Resident #10 after an incontinent episode when she failed to open the labia to clean and wipe around resident's buttocks. This failure could place residents at risk for the development and/or worsening of urinary tract infections and skin breakdown.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #32) reviewed for oxygen in that: -Resident #32's oxygen humidifier was not labelled with the date it was changed. This deficient practice could affect residents who received oxygen continuously and could result in residents receiving incorrect or inadequate oxygen support.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with professional principles, and included the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable for 1 of 1 medication rooms (Medication Room) and 2 (Halls 300 and 400 medication carts) of 4 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. - The facility failed to ensure the Medication Room did not contain multidose PPD (Tuberculin Purified Protein Derivative Diluted Aplisol) containers with no patient identifiers without opened date on container. - The facility failed to ensure the 300 and 400 hall medication carts did not contain eyedrops and nasal spray that were opened but not labeled with the resident's name and not dated. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the menu was followed for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #73) reviewed for diet. -The facility failed to ensure Resident #73 was provided a nutritional supplement as ordered. -This failure placed residents at risk of experiencing nutritional deficiencies and weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide an environment that allows the resident a right to personal privacy for 2 (Resident #43 and #39) of 21 resident rooms reviewed for environment. -The facility failed to have replaced the privacy curtains in Resident #43's and Resident #39's room after removal for cleaning/repair. This failure could place residents at risk of experiencing a decrease in their quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #191). - The facility did not develop a base line care plan for Resident #191. This failure could affect residents who require baseline care plan, and could place them at risk for physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress.
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 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 one (Residents #191) of three residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. -The facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was created or implemented for Resident #191 These failures could place the residents at risk for not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who need respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #38) of 3 resident reviewed for respiratory care. -The facility failed to follow the physician orders for Resident #38's oxygen rate of 2L. This failure could place residents who received oxygen therapy at risk of respiratory complications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that the medication error rate was not five percent (%) or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 6 percent based on 2 errors out of 29 opportunities, which involved 1 of 8 residents (Resident #5) reviewed for medication errors. - MA A failed to administer medication as ordered to Resident #5 by administering OTC Lidocaine 4% Patch, a patch used for pain, instead of RX only Lidocaine 5% to the resident's right shoulder and lower back. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the desired therapeutic effect of their medications and uncontrolled pain. Findings Include: Record review of Resident #5's Face Sheet dated 06/14/23 revealed, a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with professional principles, and included the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable for 1 of 1 medication rooms (Medication Room) reviewed for medication storage. - The facility failed to ensure the Medication Room did not contain multidose insulin containers with no patient identifiers. This failure could place residents at risk of adverse medication reactions and infections. Findings Include: Observation on 06/14/23 at 09:10 AM, inventory of the medication room with the DON revealed: - one open and in use Lantus Insulin Vial with no patient identifiers. - one open and in use Humalog Flexpen with no patient identifiers. [...]
3 fire safety citations on file: 2 on December 4, 2025, 1 on June 16, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| March 9, 2026 | Fine | $28,451 |
| September 24, 2025 | Fine | $20,495 |
| March 29, 2025 | Fine | $15,147 |
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) | 3.30 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.35 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.87 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.94 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.01 | ||
| 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 | not reported |
CMS expects 3.59 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 3.47 on weekdays and 2.87 on weekends, 17% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.40 in April to June 2025 to 3.30 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 | 3.30 | 0.35 | 3.47 | 2.87 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 90 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.36 | 0.52 | 3.57 | 2.83 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 96 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.40 | 0.67 | 3.58 | 2.94 | 0.0% | 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. 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 | 14.9 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.4 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.9 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.9 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 32.2 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 14.1 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Misty Willow Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (51.9% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
51.9% 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. 79 eligible stays.
10.3% 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. 89 eligible stays.
6.3% 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. 33 eligible stays.
65.0% 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. 39 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. 39 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. 9 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: LIBERTY COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO 1. CMS links this home to The Ensign Group, a group of 344 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liberty County Hospital District No 1 | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/01/2017 |
| Ali, Nida | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 09/18/2024 | |
| Fitzgerald, Tami | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 04/01/2017 | |
| Burnam, Soon | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2017 | |
| Keetch, Chad | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2011 | |
| Stratton, Charles | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/07/2005 | |
| Misty Willow Healthcare, Inc. | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2017 | |
| Ali, Nida | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/18/2024 | |
| Fitzgerald, Tami | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2017 | |
| Ensign Services Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2016 | |
| Misty Willow Healthcare, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/03/2025 | |
| National Health Investors, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2017 | |
| Texas Nhi Investors, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2017 | |
| Ali, Nida | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/18/2024 | |
| Fitzgerald, Tami | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2017 |
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.