315 W Anderson St., Weatherford, TX 76086 · Parker County · (817) 599-4181
59 certified beds, about 36 residents a day · For profit - Individual · Medicare and Medicaid since 2007
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676148 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 16, 2026, inspectors cited 4 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 31 health citations since February 2023, 5 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (5 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $149,221 in the last three years; the largest was $149,221, and the latest is dated September 19, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 2.65 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.46 of those hours.
92.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Creative Solutions in Healthcare, an affiliated group of 149 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 31 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the use of a registered nurse for at least 8 consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 6 of the last 12 months (October 2025, December 2025, January 2026, February 2026, May 2026, and July 2026) reviewed for Registered Nurse staffing. The facility failed to provide Registered nurse coverage for 8 hours on 10/22/2025, 12/27/2025, 12/28/2025, 1/4/2026, 2/8/2026, 2/22/2026, 2/28/2026, 5/16/2026, 7/6/2026 and 7/10/2026. These failures placed all residents at risk for delayed nursing assessments, changes in conditions not being promptly identified, and inadequate clinical oversight.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable homelike environment for 1 of 1 dining room reviewed for physical environment. The facility failed to repair an area of the ceiling in the dining room where a large section of paint had been damaged and peeled off. The facility failed to repair the attic cover in the dining room which was broken and open to the attic space. The facility failed to ensure the coax cable that was running across the ceiling in the dining room over to the TV was properly secured to the ceiling. This failure could place the residents at risk for decreased quality of life and infection due to unsanitary conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in one of one kitchen reviewed for food service. The facility failed to store dishware in a clean, dry location and not exposed to splashes, dust, or other contamination, covered and/or inverted. The facility failed to ensure that utensils/equipment/flooring were cleaned and maintained to prevent contamination. The facility failed to ensure dinnerware were clean and in good condition (e.g., not cracked or chipped). The facility failed to follow a cleaning schedule for the kitchen and food service equipment. These failures could place residents at risk of foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to provide medically related social services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 1 (resident #18) of 12 residents reviewed for behavioral health services. The facility failed to follow up on referral for a transfer to another facility before and after the SW was terminated. These failures could result in a delay of behavioral health services and care for the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews 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's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 7 residents (Resident #1 and, Resident #5) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan for Resident #1 addressed a fall, preferences, and discharge planning. The facility failed to ensure the staff developed the comprehensive care plan goals and interventions from the comprehensive assessment for Resident #5 to address nutrition, dental, pressure ulcer, communication, ADL function/rehabilitation potential, and discharge planning. This failure could place the residents at risk of inadequate care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from abuse and neglect for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to protect Resident #1 from abuse when four facility staff (LVN A, RN B, NA C and Laundry Staff D) grabbed Resident #1 and forcibly carried him by his extremities and dragged him on the floor to his room. The staff placed Resident #1 in his room and held the door closed so that he could not leave his room. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 8/25/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 8/25/25 at 5:07 PM While the IJ was removed on 8/26/25, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated, and a severity level of no actual harm, due to the facility's need to evaluate the effectiveness of their corrective actions. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from involuntary seclusion for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for involuntary seclusion. The facility failed to ensure LVN A, RN B, N/A C, and Laundry Staff D did not isolate Resident #1 as a method of addressing his behaviors. The staff placed Resident #1 in his room and held the door closed by the doorknob so that he could not leave his room as he struggled to get the door open and leave the room. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 8/25/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 8/25/25 at 5:07 PM While the IJ was removed on 8/26/25, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated, and a severity level of no actual harm, due to the facility's need to evaluate the effectiveness of their corrective actions. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical or chemical restraints imposed for purposes of discipline or convenience, and that are not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for physical restraint/chemical restraints. The facility failed to protect Resident #1 from physical restraint when LVN A, RN B, N/A C, and Laundry Staff D grabbed Resident #1 by his arms and legs which restricted his movement and dragged the resident across the floor and carried him by holding onto his arms and legs down to his room. The staff placed Resident #1 in his room and held the door closed so that he could not leave his room. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 8/25/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to implement policies and procedures for reporting when the administrator and the State Survey Agency were not notified immediately notified of abuse on 8/17/25 when 4 facility staff (LVN A, RN B, NA C, and Laundry attendant D) grabbed Resident #1 and forcibly carried him by his extremities to his room. The staff placed Resident #1 in his room and held the door closed so that he could not leave his room. The abuse was not reported to the administrator until 8/19/25. This failure could place residents at risk of physical injury, psychological trauma, and severe emotional distress. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 9/12/25. [...]
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 were identified in the comprehensive assessment which were to be furnished to attain or maintain the residents highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to implement de-escalation techniques listed on the care plan were not implemented when 4 facility staff , (LVN A RN B, NA C and Laundry staff D) grabbed Resident #1 and forcibly carried him by his extremities to his room. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to develop implement and maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff individuals providing services under a contractual management and volunteers consistent with their expected roles for 2 of 12 employees (LVN A and RN B) reviewed for required training. The facility failed to ensure LVN A and RN B had annual dementia and restraint reduction training. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving care from individuals who have not been properly trained.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately inform the resident/resident representative and consult with the resident's physician when there was a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure LVN A and LVN E communicated to the physician and POA a change in Resident #1's behavioral status that led to a change in his treatment regimen. The facility failed to ensure that RN NB communicated to the physician and the POA a change in Resident#6's health status that led to a change in his treatment regimen. This failure could place residents at risk of unmet physical and psychosocial needs, physical harm and a decrease in quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 time frames to meet, attain, and/or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 12 (Residents # 21, #25, and #145) residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #21 had a care plan in place regarding hospice services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #25 had a care plan in place regarding her diagnosis of seizure disorder. The facility failed to ensure Resident #145 had a care plan in place regarding his DNR status. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving appropriate care and supervision.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen, by failing to ensure: A. The food fryer was left in an unsanitary condition, food fryer had not been cleaned after use, food crumbs dried to fryer baskets (2) and inside fryer walls. B. Bottom shelf of food prep table was not clean and hads food crumbs on shelf and food crumbs on container lids containing flour, sugar and powder milk that wasis stored on shelf. These failures could place residents at risk for decline in nutritional health status and foodborne illness.
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 disease and infections for one (LVN A) of three staff reviewed for infection control practices. LVN A did not perform any hand hygiene before or after medication administration for Resident #26, Resident #4, or Resident #8. LVN A did not sanitize reusable electronic wrist blood pressure cuff before or after use during medication administration for Resident #4 or Resident #8. These failures could place residents at risk of the spread of infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse and neglect for 3 of 7 staff (LVN #1, [NAME] #2,CNA #3, and CNA #4) reviewed for background screenings. The facility failed to ensure that employees were screened for a history of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or misappropriation prior to employment for LVN #1, Cook# 2, and CNA #3, and CNA # 4. Criminal history checks, and checks of the EMR/NAR were not conducted prior to employment. These deficient practices could place residents at risk for abuse and neglect.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development of communicable diseases and infections for 1 (Resident # 4) of 6 residents reviewed for infection control, in that: The facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions for Resident #4 who required feedings via a gastrostomy tube (a surgically created hole with a tube inserted into the stomach to provide an alternative route for nutrition and hydration for the resident). This failure could affect residents and place them at risk for cross contamination and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs, biologicals and medical supplies used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, for 3 of 3 medication storage areas (medication room, Short Hall Cart, and Long Hall Cart ) reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure that all medications and supplies stored in the medication room the short hall Medication Cart were properly labeled and not past their expiration date. The Change-of-Shift Record of Control Substance Log for the Short Hall Medication Cart, and the Long Hall medication carts were missing signatures. These failures could place resident's at risk of ineffective therapeutic response to medications and a decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed kitchen sanitization. 1. The facility failed to ensure the floors were not soiled with food particles beneath the appliances and stainless-steel shelf units throughout the kitchen and dry storage area. 2. The facility failed to ensure two of two refrigerators did not have what appeared to be dried liquids, and food crumbs on the bottom floor of the refrigerator. These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness and a decline in health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, 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 4(Resident #16, Resident #19, Resident #24 and Resident #20) of 19 residents in dining room reviewed for infection control techniques in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA washed or sanitized her hands in between feeding resident #20 and resident #24. 2. The facility failed to ensure the Hospitality Aide-A washed or sanitized her hands between feeding resident #16 and resident #19. These failures could place residents at risk of infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to conduct a comprehensive assessment within 14 calendar days after admission as required for 1 of 5 resident records reviewed (Resident #2) in that: Resident #2 did not have an initial comprehensive assessment completed. This failure could place newly admitted residents at risk for not having needs met and could decrease the resident's ability to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment and describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered for Resident #1 with collaboration of the IDT. This failure could affect all newly admitted residents by placing them at risk for not having their individual needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents for 6 out of 10 (Resident #4, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12) rooms reviewed for environment. The facility window blinds in Resident's 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 rooms were damaged. This failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life due to the lack of a well- kept environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to permit residents to return to the facility after they are hospitalized , for 1 (Resident 6) of 3 residents reviewed for fair hearings. The facility failed permit Resident 6 to return to the facility after hospitalization. This failure could place residents, who transfer to hospital, at risk of being denied readmission to the facility and could result in a decreased quality of life and resident's rights violations.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in one of one kitchen reviewed. 1. The refrigerator did not have a manual thermometer located inside where food was stored. 2. Raw food was improperly stored in the freezer. 3. Employees failed to wash their hands using the handwashing sink between tasks and exiting or the entering kitchen during meal preparation. These failures by the facility placed residents at risk of acquiring foodborne illnesses and a decline in health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to dispose of garbage and refuse properly for one of two dumpsters. One dumpster was uncovered and overfilled and there was trash on the ground near the uncovered dumpster. This failure placed residents at risk of acquiring diseases from invasive species such as rodents and flying insects attracted to open containers of trash.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for 4 (Resident #35, #19, #39, and #4) of 4 residents checked for hot water temperatures. The facility failed to maintain hot water temperatures (100 - 110 degrees Fahrenheit) in the resident's bathroom sinks in both the short and long hallways. This failure could affect residents who had a bathroom by placing them at risk for infection, a decline in hygiene, low self-esteem, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents unable to carry out activities of daily living, received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (Residents #26) of 7 female residents for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #26 who had excess facial hair had been shaved or oral care had been performed. This failure could place residents at risk for poor self-esteem and dental caries (also known as tooth decay or dental cavities).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent a potential hazard for 1 (Resident #5) of 25 residents eating in the facility's only dining room from spreading disease. During lunch service on 02/07/2023 at12:35 PM Resident #5 was observed eating left-over food meant to be discarded. The facility's failure to supervise wandering Resident #5 from eating discarded food could potentially place residents at risk for spreading disease.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of infections for1 (Resident# 92) of 2 residents observed for incontinent care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #92 was provided incontinent care by staff who demonstrated correct infection control procedures. These failures could place residents at risk for acquiring and/or spreading infectious diseases.
Inspectors wroteTag: F-732/N-4144 S/S= C Surveyor Name(s): [NAME] RN Immediate Supervisor: [NAME] Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure that the daily nurse staffing was posted as required for 3 of 3 days (2/5/23, 2/6/23, and 2/7/23). The facility failed to update the daily staffing information posting. This failure could affect residents, their families, and facility visitors by placing them at risk of not having access to information regarding staffing data and facility census.
4 fire safety citations on file: 1 on July 16, 2026, 2 on March 7, 2024, 1 on February 7, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| September 19, 2025 | Fine | $149,221 |
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) | 2.65 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.46 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.29 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.33 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.86 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 92.0% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 75.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.47 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 2.80 on weekdays and 2.29 on weekends, 18% 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 3.16 in April to June 2025 to 2.65 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 | 2.65 | 0.46 | 2.80 | 2.29 | 0.0% | 2 of 90 | 36 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.14 | 0.55 | 3.27 | 2.82 | 0.0% | 2 of 92 | 37 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.17 | 0.62 | 3.41 | 2.56 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 43 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.16 | 0.49 | 3.25 | 2.95 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 45 |
| 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 | 18.6 | 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 | 1.4 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.1 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.8 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.3 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.8 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 41.9 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 21.1 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Peach Tree Place'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. 7 eligible stays.
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 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. 17 eligible stays.
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 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. 7 eligible stays.
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: 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. 17 residents counted.
11.5% 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. 26 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. 26 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: FANNIN COUNTY HOSPITAL AUTHORITY. CMS links this home to Creative Solutions in Healthcare, a group of 149 nursing homes averaging 2.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fannin County Hospital Authority | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/01/2022 |
| Holt, Erin | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 02/25/2020 | |
| Keeton, Wendy | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/29/2012 | |
| Kissling, Monica | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 06/21/2017 | |
| McBean, Patricia | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/30/2021 | |
| Sanderson, Clark | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/29/2012 | |
| Trompler, Kelly | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 02/22/2022 | |
| Huggins, Linda | Corporate director | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Willig, Zachary | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Sanderson, Clark | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/29/2012 | |
| Weatherford I Enterprises, L.L.C. | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Blake, Gary | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Blake, Malisa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Weatherford I Enterprises, L.L.C. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/13/2025 | |
| Blake, Gary | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Rodriguez, Kimberly | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/13/2025 | |
| Wusterhausen, Kris | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/13/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Texas. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.