2712 Hurstview Dr, Hurst, TX 76054 · Tarrant County · (817) 281-6707
161 certified beds, about 107 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1986
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 455626 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 10, 2026, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 34 health citations since December 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $31,576 in the last three years; the largest was $15,940, and the latest is dated October 31, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.24 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.31 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 34 health citations on file.
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 safety for the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure:- food appliances, including the microwave, toaster, and steamer were clean and sanitized; - the kitchen floors were clean and free of dust and debris;- 3 large dry ingredient food containers were clean;- food preparation tables were clean and free of old food residue; - the dishwasher's wash cycle reached 120 degrees Fahrenheit to properly clean and sanitize dishware and utensils; and - all kitchen staff were educated on 03/18/26 regarding the facility's expectations for the kitchen. These failures could place residents at risk for cross-contamination and foodborne illness.
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 on one of four medication carts (Hall 700/Hall 800 nurses' medication cart) and 2 of 2 Residents (Residents#10 and #24) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to ensure the Narcotic Log on the Hall 700/Hall 800 nurses' medication cart were accurate for administration of the narcotic pain medication hydrocodone/acetaminophen for Resident #24 and the narcotic pain medication oxycodone for Resident #10.2. LVN F failed to document the administration of narcotic medications in a correct and timely manner on the MAR and NAR for Residents #10 and #24. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one of two residents (Resident #4) reviewed for infection control, in that: The facility failed to ensure after Resident #4 readmitted to the facility with rhinovirus (a type of virus that is one of the most common causes of the common cold) that physician orders were obtained for the resident to be placed on droplet precautions, which are infection control measures to prevent the spread of infection through respiratory droplets. This failure could place residents at risk for exposure to a contagious disease, infection, and possible hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who are fed by enteral means received the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for 1 (Resident #1) of 4 residents reviewed for nutrition. -On 01/07/26 the facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received appropriate treatment to prevent complications of enteral feeding when LVN A did not connect the resident's g-tube to the feeding pump, causing the formula to waste onto the floor for approximately 1.5 hours. This failure could place residents who receive enteral feeding at risk for inadequate nutrition and hydration, which could cause a decline in health.
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 resident (Residents #1) of 7 residents reviewed for respiratory care. -The facility failed to ensure that Residents #1, who required continuous oxygen therapy, received adequate oxygen when his portable oxygen tank ran out of oxygen while the resident was in the community at an appointment on 10/29/2025. Resident #1 was transported to the local hospital and diagnosed with acute hypoxia (low levels of oxygen) The non-compliance was identified as past non-compliance (PNC). The Immediate Jeopardy began on 10/29/25 and ended on 10/30/25. The facility had corrected the non-compliance before the state's investigation began. [...]
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 for 4 of 5 residents (Residents #1, #2, #3, and #4) reviewed for infection control. 1. MA A, CNA B, and CNA C failed to perform hand hygiene before entering and exiting Resident #1's room on 08/01/25. 2. MA A, CNA B, and CNA C failed to put on PPE recommended for residents on contact precautions on 08/01/25. 3. MA A failed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff (reusable medical devices) between residents on 08/01/25. This failure could place residents at risk of cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are complete; accurately documented; readily accessible; and systematically organized for four (Resident #1, #2, #3 and #4) of seven residents reviewed for pressure ulcers and non-pressure wounds. 1. The facility failed to document skin care was provided for Resident #1 on 05/01/25 and 05/06/25. 2. The facility failed to document wound care was provided for Resident #2 on 05/02/25. 3. The facility failed to document wound care was provided for Resident #3 on 04/24/25 and 05/02/25. 4. The facility failed to document wound care was provided for Resident #4 on 04/27/25, 04/28/25 and 04/29/25. [...]
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 1 of 2 meals (lunch) reviewed for food meeting residents' needs. The facility failed to prepare and serve pureed turkey tetrazzini as a pudding consistency for residents who required pureed diets during the lunch meal on 04/09/25. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not receiving meals that meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to incorporate the recommendations from the PASRR Level II determination and the PASRR evaluation report for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #13) reviewed for PASRR assessments. The facility did not refer Resident #13 to the appropriate state-designated mental health authority for review when he received a new diagnosis of major depressive disorder. This failure could place residents at risk of not being evaluated and receive needed PASRR services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received necessary services to maintain good grooming, and personal hygiene for 1 of 25 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's fingernails was clean and cut. This failure could place residents at risk for poor hygiene, dignity issues, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure any drug regimen irregularities reported by the Pharmacist Consultant were acted upon, for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #40) whose drug regimens were reviewed. The facility's Pharmacy Consultant recommended the facility include a diagnosis to the medication order to support therapy for Quetiapine on 10/13/24 and 11/13/24 for Resident #40. This failure could place residents receiving medications at risk for adverse consequences and could cause a decline in their physical, mental, and psychosocial condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents who use psychotropic drugs receive gradual dose reductions, and behavioral interventions, unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to discontinue these drugs for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #40) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #40 had an appropriate diagnosis for her prescribed Seroquel (used to treat depression). This failure could place residents at risk of possible psychotropic medication side effects, adverse consequences, decreased quality of life, and dependence on unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received proper treatment and care to maintain good foot health by providing foot care and treatment, in accordance with professional standards of practice, including to prevent complications from the resident's medical condition for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for foot care. The facility failed ensure foot care, specifically trimming of toenails, was provided for Residents #1. This failure could result in residents developing fungal infections or other podiatric problems.
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 included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan addressed activities of daily living. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the care required to meet their individual needs.
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, in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure DCH A wore a hair restraint while in the kitchen. 2. The facility failed to ensure foods stored in the walk-in cooler, walk-in freezer and dry storage area were properly sealed, labeled and dated. 3. The facility failed to ensure the walk-in cooler maintained an internal temperature below 41 Fahrenheit. These failures could place residents who received meals and/or snacks from the kitchen at risk for food borne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident or the resident's representative of the transfer or discharge and the reasons for the move in writing and in a language and manner they understand and send a copy of the notice to a representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for discharge notices. The facility failed to notify Resident #1 or her representative in writing of her transfer/discharge to the hospital for behavioral reasons, the reason for the transfer, and the right to appeal and they failed to send a copy of the notice to the ombudsman as soon as practicable of the transfer/discharge. This failure could place residents at risk of being transferred or discharged , and not having access to available advocacy services, discharge/transfer options, and appeal processes.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident rooms were equipped with privacy curtains the assured full visual privacy for 11 of 53 rooms (Rooms 201, 202, 205, 207, 211, 302, 305, 306, 307, 406, and 409) reviewed for visual privacy. 1. LVN C and CNA D failed to ensure Resident #2 had full visual privacy while providing care. 2. The facility failed to ensure the residents in the A beds in Rooms 201, 202, 205, 207, 211, 302, 305, 306, 307, 406, and 409 had privacy curtains to assure full visual privacy. This failure could place residents at risk of being exposed to the hallway during cares.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program for preventing, identifying, reporting, investigating, and controlling infections and communicable diseases for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control. Housekeeper A picked popcorn off the floor and placed it back into Resident #1's bag and was subsequently eaten by Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk of exposure to pathogens from the floor. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The noncompliance began on 03/20/24 and ended on 03/21/24. The facility corrected the noncompliance before the survey began.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a private meeting space for the residents' monthly council meetings for 12 of 12 confidential residents reviewed for resident council. The facility failed to provide a private space for resident council meetings. This failure could place residents, who attended resident council meetings, at risk of not being able to voice concerns due to a lack of privacy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents had physician's orders for the resident's immediate care for 1 (Resident #45) of 16 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to obtain follow-up orders when Resident #45 returned to the facility from the hospital with a splint after she was diagnosed with an elbow fracture. The failure placed residents at risk of not receiving needed treatments to prevent conditions from worsening.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, 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 medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs for 1 (Resident #66) of 6 residents reviewed for care plans. 1. The facility failed to develop a care plan for Resident #66 that addressed her use of dentures. 2. The facility failed to update Resident #66's care plan to address changes in diet texture, weight loss, or health shakes at lunch and dinner. 3. The facility failed to develop a care plan that addressed Resident #66's need to have assistance for eating. 4. The facility failed to develop a care plan with measurable objectives and timeframes to address Resident #66, hospice services. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #10 and Resident #66) reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #10, and Resident #66 had feeding assistance for more than 30 minutes after lunch trays were delivered to their rooms. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving appropriate care, assistance when needed, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weigh or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrated that was not possible or the resident preferences indicated otherwise for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #66 and Resident #115) reviewed for nutrition status maintenance. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #66 had a heath shake with lunch and dinner. 2. The facility failed to measure and record Resident #115's body weight, as ordered by the resident's physician, for three weeks in November 2023. These failures could place residents at risk of weight loss, weight gain, nutritional deficit, and adverse health consequences.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #42) of 3 residents reviewed for dialysis. The facility failed to ensure dialysis assessments were completed for Resident #42 after return from dialysis treatment. This failure could place residents at risk of inadequate post dialysis 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 on one of three medication carts (Hall 507-708 nurses' cart) and 4 of 4 Residents (Resident #43, #91, #93 and #102) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to ensure the Hall 507-708 nurses medication cart contained accurate narcotic record for Residents #43 and #91. 2. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #93's Bengay Greaseless External Cream 10-15% (Menthol-Methyl Salicylate (Liniments) and one bottle of nicotine lozenges were stored properly. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure any drug regimen irregularities reported by the Pharmacist Consultant were acted upon, for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #14 and #98) reviewed for unnecessary medications, psychotropic medications, and medication regimen review. The facility's Pharmacist Consultant recommended Residents #14 and #98 antipsychotic medication Quetiapine required an additional consent on the Form 3713 to be completed and uploaded to the resident's chart. These failures could place residents on psychotropic medications at risk for possible adverse side effects, adverse consequences, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assist residents in obtaining routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for one of 4 residents (Resident #66) reviewed for dental services. The facility failed to assist in providing dental services for Resident #66. This failure could place residents at risk of oral complications, dental pain, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the menu was followed for 1 (the lunch meal on 03/19/24) of 4 lunches reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure the seven residents (Residents #9, #10, #46, #66, #75, #79, and #159) on a pureed diet were served pureed bread and pureed chicken fried steak during the lunch meal on 03/19/24. This failure could place residents at risk for unwanted weight loss, hunger, unwanted weight gain, and metabolic imbalances.
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 safety for 5 (Administrator, [NAME] Z, Dietary Aide X, Dietary Aide W, and Dietary Aide V) of 5 staff and 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation, in that: 1. [NAME] Z placed food containers of the lunch meal in the steamtable that contained contaminated water. 2. The Administrator, Dietary Aide X, Dietary Aide W, and Dietary Aide V failed to wear a hair restraint while in the kitchen. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for 1 (Resident #115) of 5 residents reviewed for clinical records. 1. The facility failed to ensure staff accurately documented on Resident #115's October 2023 MAR that he received his medications. 2. The facility failed to ensure staff kept copies of Resident #115's shower sheets from September and October 2023. These failures could affect residents and place them at risk of inaccurate or incomplete clinical records.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received and the facility provided food and drink that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for one of three meals (lunch on 03/19/24) reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to prepare food that conserved nutritive value and was at an appetizing taste and temperature for the lunch meal on 03/19/24. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of poor intake of nutrition, weight loss, and illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the residents are free from accidents and hazards for one (Resident #1) of two residents reviewed for mechanical lift transfers. The facility failed to safely transfer Resident #1 and prevent injury during the use of the mechanical Hoyer lift, resulting in a laceration on the forehead on 12/16/23 and back pain on 11/20/23. This failure could place residents at risk for accidents that could lead to injuries such as bruising, skin tears and fractures.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure parenteral fluids were administered consistent with professional standards for one (Resident #2) of three residents reviewed for intravenous fluids. 1. The facility failed to date and maintain the integrity of the PICC/CVC line dressing per professional standards for Resident #2. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN C had training on IV administration and IV dressing changes. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk for infections and cross-contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs were provided for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's call light was placed within his reach. This failure could place dependent residents at risk of injuries and unmet needs.
15 fire safety citations on file: 3 on June 10, 2026, 2 on April 10, 2025, 10 on March 21, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| October 31, 2025 | Fine | $15,940 |
| September 4, 2024 | Fine | $6,151 |
| December 7, 2023 | Fine | $9,485 |
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) | 3.24 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.31 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.87 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.93 | ||
| 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 | 0 |
CMS expects 3.53 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 3.40 on weekdays and 2.87 on weekends, 16% 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 3.52 in April to June 2025 to 3.24 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 | 3.24 | 0.31 | 3.40 | 2.87 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 107 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.23 | 0.26 | 3.42 | 2.76 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 108 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.17 | 0.38 | 3.34 | 2.72 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 108 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.52 | 0.49 | 3.68 | 3.13 | 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 | 12.5 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 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 | 3.9 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.2 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.8 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.3 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 40.0 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.1 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.8 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Oakmont Guest Care 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. 20 eligible stays.
9.1% 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. 46 eligible stays.
8.3% 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. 26 eligible stays.
33.3% 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. 21 residents counted.
10.5% 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. 38 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. 38 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: NOCONA HOSPITAL DISTRICT.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nocona Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 01/01/2024 |
| Meekins, Greg | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Oakmont Guest Care Center LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2024 | |
| Culp, John | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Gamble, Denny | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Gamvest Texas LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2020 | |
| Oakmont Guest Care Center LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/30/2025 | |
| Culp, John | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Gamble, Denny | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2020 | |
| Huntzinger, Howard | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2024 |
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.