8825 Lamplighter Ln, Port Arthur, TX 77642 · Jefferson County · (409) 727-1651
199 certified beds, about 65 residents a day · For profit - Partnership · Medicare and Medicaid since 1995
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675541 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 25, 2025, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 50 health citations since March 2023, 5 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (5 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 4 fines totaling $310,553 in the last three years; the largest was $204,685, and the latest is dated June 4, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.06 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.26 of those hours.
44.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Cascades Healthcare, an affiliated group of 19 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 50 health citations on file.
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 1 of 2 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for infection prevention. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA D used PPE when she provided care to Resident #2 who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for his suprapubic catheter. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA D did not place and leave Resident #2's suprapubic catheter bag on the floor. 3. The facility failed to ensure CNA D performed hand hygiene before starting care, between glove changes and after completed care. These deficient practices could place residents at risk for infection.
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 and restore continence to the extent possible for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for treatment and services related to indwelling suprapubic catheters. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's indwelling suprapubic catheter was secured on [DATE]. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's indwelling suprapubic catheter was a 16 FR (catheter with size of 5.3 mm) instead of an 18 FR (catheter with size of 6 mm diameter). These failures could place residents at risk for urinary tract infections, dislodgment, potential complications and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to review and revise resident's comprehensive care plans by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment to reflect the current condition for 1 of 18 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan was updated to indicate Resident #1 had a resident-to-resident incident on 07/18/2025 and 08/16/2025. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions to meet their current needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for treatment and services related to indwelling catheters. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's Foley catheter (an indwelling catheter) was secured on 11/04/2025. This failure could place residents at risk for urinary tract infections, dislodgment, potential complications and a decreased quality of life.
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 and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to medication carts for 1 of 4 Nurse medication carts (Hall 300 Nurse Cart) reviewed for medication storage. LVN A failed to ensure the Hall 300 Nurse medication cart was kept locked and under direct observation where residents and unauthorized staff could not access it when left at the main nurse's station for five minutes on 11/04/2025 at 9:23 a.m. This failure could place residents at risk of unauthorized persons, as well as residents, at risk of gaining access to unlocked medications that were not prescribed to them.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for residents, staff, and the public, for 2 of 4 shower rooms (Hall 300 and Hall 400) reviewed for physical environment. Hall 300's shower room had two shower chairs soiled with brownish/black substance under seats and on frames. Hall 400's shower room had a shower bed and under the cushion with a thick black substance. This failure could lead to residents experiencing a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from verbal and physical abuse for 4 of 7 residents reviewed for abuse. (Residents #3, #9, #37, and #55) 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3 was free from physical abuse when Resident #61 rolled up in her wheelchair and slapped Resident #3 on the face on 05/28/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #9 was free from verbal abuse when Resident #46 cursed her and told her it was her fault her daughter died on [DATE]. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #37 was free from physical abuse when Resident #46 walked up to her, grabbed her by the wrists, and shook her on 06/11/25. 4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #55 was free from physical abuse when Resident #45 hit her on the arm when she backed into him with her wheelchair on 06/14/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the services provided or arranged by the facility, as outlined by the comprehensive care plan, meet professional standards of quality for 2 of 7 residents reviewed for following physician orders. (Residents #46 and #317) 1. The facility did not administer a new medication Depakote prescribed to Resident #46 for behaviors as ordered. 2. The facility did not obtain a urine specimen on Resident #317 for a UTI Panel prior to ABT administration as ordered. These failures could place the residents at risk of not having their individual needs met and of not receiving adequate care and medical interventions to maintain their health and prevent worsening health conditions.
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 1 of 5 medication carts(400 Hall cart) and 1 of 1 treatment carts (Station 2 Nurse Cart) reviewed for medication storage. - The facility failed to ensure the medication treatment cart was locked when left unsecured and unsupervised at the main nurse station. - The facility failed to ensure Hall 400 Nurse Cart did not contain loose pills. - The facility failed to ensure an insulin pen of basaglar insulin (long acting insulin used to lower blood sugar) had a date as to when it was opened. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to consult with the resident's physician when there was a need to alter treatment for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for physician notification. (Residents #46 and #317) 1. The facility failed to notify the physician of Resident #317 when an ordered UTI Panel specimen was not obtained. 2. The facility failed to notify the physician of Resident #46 when he missed 2 doses of Depakote a new medication prescribed for behaviors. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate medical treatments, which could result in a decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received an accurate assessment, reflective of the resident's status for 1 of 23 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. (Resident #s 14) The facility did not accurately complete the MDS assessment to indicate Resident #14 did not have a restraint/ side rail. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review , the facility failed to accurately submit a PL1 (PASRR Level 1 Screening) screening when a resident admitted with a diagnosis of Mental Illness, Intellectual Disability or Developmental Disability for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for PASRR screenings. (Resident # 29) The facility failed to submit a new PL1 screening when Resident #29 was readmitted from mental health hospital on [DATE] . This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving specialized services.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals and preferences for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for tracheostomy care. (Resident #317) LVN A did not change Resident #317's outer tracheostomy cannula on 05/11/25 as listed on the May 2025 MAR. This failure could place residents with a tracheostomy at risk for infections to the tracheostomy site.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, 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 (Resident #117) of seven residents and one of five medication carts(Hall 400 cart) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure all of Resident #117's medications was administered as ordered by the physician resulting in the incorrect dose of Vitamin C administration. The facility failed to ensure three insulin pens of aspart insulin were removed from use. Aspart insulin (rapid acting insulin used to lower blood sugar), with open date of 04/25/25, had been expired for 31 days, open date of 05/19/25, had been expired for 9 days, and open date of 05/23/25, had been expired for 5 days. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary medication for 1 of 23 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. (Resident #22) The facility failed to hold two of Resident #22's blood pressure medications when the blood pressure and/or heart rate was outside the prescribed parameters. This failure could place the residents at risk for adverse consequences and decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 10 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and supervision. The facility failed to ensure adequate supervision for Resident #1 with two staff members for bed mobility during incontinent care to prevent a fall with injury on 9/19/2024 which resulted in Resident #1 having complaint of pain to the right knee. An x-ray was conducted on 09/19/2024 with the results of evidence of acute fracture of the right distal femur (bone in the upper leg) requiring hospitalization for surgical intervention. The non-compliance was identified as past non-compliance. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 09/19/2024 and ended on 09/24/2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported, immediately but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse or bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, including the State Survey Agency in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 10 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for reporting allegations of abuse. The admission Coordinator failed to ensure allegations of abuse were reported to the Abuse Coordinator immediately. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 out of 3 (Resident #2 and Resident #3) residents reviewed for enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) and the wound care process for infection control practices. LVN B failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions while providing wound care for Resident #3. The facility failed to ensure LVN C followed appropriate infection control during wound care treatment for Resident #2. The failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for 4 of 14 residents (Resident #2, #3, #4 and #5) reviewed for abuse, neglect, and exploitation. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2, #3, #4, and #5 were free of abuse from Resident #1. -On 07/10/24 Res #1 hit Res #3's head. -On 07/21/24 Res #1 hit Res #2 in the TV room. -On 07/22/24 Res #1 pushed Res #2 in the TV room. Res #2 sustained a head injury and was sent out to the ER for treatment. -On 09/02/24 Res #4 alleged Res #1 hit her. -On 11/24/24 Res #1 punched Res #3 in the forehead and chest. -On 12/28/24, Res #1 hit Res #5 in the face in the dining room The facility did not review, update, or implement interventions to include adequate supervision and continued to leave Resident #1 alone and unsupervised with other residents. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to investigate and report the findings of the investigation to the State Survey Agency within 5 working days of the incident for 2 of 7 residents (Residents #6 and #7) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to investigate and submit the results of their investigation within 5 days after Resident #6 slapped Resident #7 on 05/20/24. These failures could place residents at risk of abuse, physical harm, mental anguish and emotional distress.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to consult with the resident's physician when there was a need to alter treatment for 2 of 24 residents (Residents #68 and #71) reviewed for notification of changes. The facility failed to ensure the physician was notified of a change in condition when Resident #68's blood pressure was SBP>160, and DBP>90. (Systolic blood pressure refers to the amount of pressure experienced by the arteries while the heart is beating. Diastolic blood pressure refers to the amount of pressure in the arteries while the heart is resting in between heartbeats) The facility failed to ensure the physician was consulted regarding holding Resident #71's medication when vital signs were outside the prescribed parameters. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the rights of residents to be free from abuse or neglect for 2 of 18 residents reviewed for abuse or neglect. (Residents #s 16 and 28) The facility failed to ensure Resident #16 was free from verbal abuse by a staff member. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28 was free from physical abuse when his roommate grabbed his arm causing redness. The failure could place residents at risk for abuse/neglect, humiliation, intimidation, fear, shame, agitation, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to implement their written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property for 3 of 18 residents (Resident #s 16, 28 and 72) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure Resident #16 was free from verbal abuse from CNA A. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28 was free from physical agression. The facility failed to ensure Resident #72 was free from physical aggression from Resident #72 who grabbed his arm while standing over him resulting in redness to his forearm. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse, physical harm, mental anguish, and emotional distress.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse of residents were reported immediately to the administrator and to HHSC within the 2-hour period for 3 of 18 residents (Resident #16, #28, and #72) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure allegations of resident-to-resident altercations and resident and staff altercations were reported immediately to the administrator and to the State Agency no later than 2 hours after the incident occurred or was suspected. The facility failed to report an allegation of verbal abuse to the administrator and to the State Agency within 2 hours when Resident #16 was involved in verbal altercation with CNA. The facility failed to report an allegation of physical abuse within 2 hours to the State Agency when Resident #72 grabbed Resident #28. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the status for 2 of 18 residents reviewed for assessments. (Residents #21 and #40). The facility failed to complete an accurate resident assessment for Resident #21. Resident #21's resident assessment did not indicate she received special treatments, procedures, and programs of tracheostomy care. The facility failed to complete an accurate resident assessment for Resident #40. Resident #40's resident assessment did not indicate he received special treatments, procedures, and programs of dialysis. This failure could place residents at risk of not having individual needs met and a decreased quality of life.
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 grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 18 residents reviewed for ADLs. (Resident #20) The facility failed to ensure Resident #20's fingernails were trimmed. The resident had contractures to the left upper fingers and thumb. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving the care and services to maintain their highest level of physical, mental and psycho-social well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with limited range of motion received appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or to prevent further decrease in range of motion for 1 of 18 residents reviewed for range of motion. (Resident #20) The facility did not ensure Resident #20 had a splint to the left contracted hand as ordered. This failure could place the residents at risk of 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 that a resident who needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals and preferences for 1 of 18 residents reviewed for oxygen administration. (Resident #15) The facility failed to administer Resident #15's oxygen at 2 liters as ordered. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving the care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident to ensure the accurate administration of medications for 1 of 18 residents reviewed for medication administration. (Resident #40) The facility did not document blood pressure (BP) or heart rate (HR) for Resident #40 on the MAR, before administering medications with orders that included instructions to hold for prescribed parameters. This failure could place residents with prescribed medication parameters at risk of not receiving the desired therapeutic effects of their medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs for 1 of 18 residents reviewed. (Resident #71) The facility did not hold Resident #71 metoprolol tartrate when the resident's heart rate was outside parameters set by the physician. This failure could place the residents at risk of adverse side effects from medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility with more than 120 beds failed to employ a qualified social worker on a full-time basis for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for social worker qualifications. The facility failed to employ a qualified social worker full-time for all residents residing there. The facility was without a full-time SW for approximately 6 months (from November 2023 - present date, May 2024). This failure could place residents at risk of social service and psychosocial needs not being met.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) training that outlines and informs staff of the elements and goals of the facility's QAPI program was provided for 8 of 23 staff (Dietary Supervisor, ADON W, LVN T, LVN U, Laundry Supervisor, CNA E, CNA X and CNA V) reviewed for training. The facility failed to ensure that Dietary Supervisor, ADON W, LVN T, LVN U, Laundry Supervisor, CNA E, CNA X and CNA V completed the QAPI training. This failure could place residents at risk for staff not being aware of the QAPI program injury or improper care due to a lack of training.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 4 of 12 residents (Resident #1, Resident #4, Resident #5, and Resident #6) reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility failed to document weekly wound assessment to Resident #1's inner left ankle trauma wound the week of 01/30/2024. The facility failed to document ordered wound care to Resident'#1's inner left ankle trauma wound on 01/25/2024, 02/02/2024, 02/08/2024, 03/29/2024 and 03/30/2024. The facility failed to document Resident #4, and Resident #5 wounds were assessed weekly, and care was performed as ordered. The facility failed to document weekly skin assessments to Resident #1, Resident #5, and Resident #6. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide behavioral health services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for behavioral health services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 received behavioral health services after returning to facility following an inpatient stay at behavioral health hospital for a resident-to-resident altercation with behavioral symptoms occurred. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving behavioral health services and a decline in Quality of life. Findings Included: 1. Record review of Resident #2's face sheet dated 04/14/2024 indicated he was [AGE] years old, initially admitted on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE] after an admission to behavioral hospital following a resident-to-resident altercation. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 14 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to ensure CNA D had assistance from another staff member during incontinent care on 01/13/24 which resulted in Resident #1 rolling off the bed and being transferred to the hospital where she was diagnosed with a small left anterior frontal scalp hematoma. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 01/13/24 and ended on 01/15/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk for falls resulting in injury, pain, and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to implement their written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property for 11 of 27 residents (Resident #s 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure the abuse coordinator and/or designee implemented the facility policy to report immediately to HHSC withing two hours of an allegation or incident of alleged abuse: 1. The facility failed to report immediately to the abuse coordinator and failed to report to HHS on 6/12/23, after LVN A was hit by Resident #5, LVN A assaulted Resident #5. She pushed Resident #5 hard against a wall, elbowed her in the face, and scratched her face. LVN A continued to work in the facility from the time of the incident (approximately 5:16 p.m.) until 9:11 p. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents the right to be free from abuse for 2 of 27 residents (Resident #s 5 and 10) reviewed for abuse in that: 1. On 6/12/23, after LVN A was hit by Resident #5, LVN A assaulted Resident #5. She pushed Resident #5 hard against a wall, elbowed her in the face, and scratched her face. LVN A continued to work in the facility from the time of the incident (approximately 5:16 p.m.) until 9:11 p.m. on 06/12/23 and from 6 a.m. until 9:30 a.m. on 06/13/23. 2. On 7/24/23 CNA B restrained Resident #10 by the wrists, put her hands around Resident 10's neck, and was rough with her during care. CNA B worked from the time of the incident (approximately 5:16 p.m.) until 10:03 p.m. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was identified on 10/31/23. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 2:32 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable homelike environment for 12 of 12 resident rooms (Room #s 302, 304, 306, 307, 311, 401, 403, 406, 502, 503, 505, and 510) reviewed for physical environment. The facility failed to ensure the air conditioning units were clean in 12 residents' rooms. There was unknown black substance coating the vents. 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 ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (which included to the State Survey Agency and adult protective services where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities) in accordance with State law through established procedures for 11 of 27 residents (Resident #s 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11) reviewed for abuse in that: 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the medical record of each resident was accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 1 of 27 residents (Resident #12) reviewed for medical records. The facility failed to ensure Resident #12's fall on 10/09/23 was documented. This failure could place residents at risk for delayed care and appropriate interventions.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure prompt efforts were made to resolve resident grievances for 1 of 11 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for grievances. The facility did not immediately address concerns related to Resident #1's nutritional needs, feeding pump, possible weight loss, or room cleanliness. The facility did not address grievances from resident council meetings. This failure could place all residents at risk of unresolved grievances and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the environment remained free of accident hazards for 1 of 1 unsecured chemical storage reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure chemicals were in a secured location. This failure could place residents, staff and visitors at risk of living, working or being in an unsafe environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement written policy to prhibit and prevent abuse, neglect,and exploitation of resident and misappropriation of resident property for 1 of 19 residents (Resident #87) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to implement facility's written abuse policy to ensure the Housekeeping Supervisor did not verbally abuse Resident #87. This failure could place residents at risk for psychosocial harm and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, which included injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, which included the State Survey Agency, in accordance with State law through established procedures for 2 of 19 residents (Residents # 87 and #37) reviewed for abuse, neglect, and exploitation. 1. The facility's abuse/neglect coordinator failed to report an allegation of verbal abuse that occurred on 3/26/23 to HHSC timely for Resident #87. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the residents status assure that each resident received an accurate assessment, reflective of the resident's status at the time of the assessment, by staff qualified to assess relevant care areas and who are knowledgeable about the resident's status for 2 of 19 residents (Residents #4 and #63) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. (Resident #4 and #63) 1. The facility failed to accurately assess Resident #4 for smoking. 2. The facility failed to accurately assess Resident #63 for PASRR positive. This These failures could place the residents at risk for not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain the highest level of well-being.
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 2 of 19 residents (Residents #25 and #41) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #25 was care planned for Hospice services. 2. The facility failed to follow physician orders related to a blood pressure medication for Resident #41. 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 that a resident maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status, unless the residents clinical condition demonstrated that it was not possible or the residents' preferences indicated otherwise, based on a resident's comprehensive assessment for 1 of 19 residents (Resident #25) reviewed for weight loss. The facility failed to ensure Resident #25 received a health shake supplement as ordered for the noon meal on 03/28/23. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure, based on a comprehensive assessment of a resident, to ensure residents' who used psychotropic drugs were adequately monitred and free from unnecessary drugs for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #48) whose records were reviewed for psychotropic drugsunnecessary medications. (Resident #48) The facility failed to monitor Resident #48 for side effects of antidepressant medication. This failure could place residents at risk for adverse drug reactions of psychotropic medications such as dizziness, fatigue and sleep disturbances.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food safety for one of one kitchen reviewed for food service safety. The facility failed to ensure Tray Aide B [dietary staff] prepared food wore a hair restraint while in the kitchen. This failure could place residents at risk of cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement established policies, in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations, regarding smoking, smoking areas, and smoking safety that also took into account nonsmoking residents for 1 of 2 smoking areas (secured smoking area) reviewed for smoking safety. The facility failed to maintain the smoking area located outside the facility's secure unit. This failure could place smoking residents residing in the secure unit at risk of an unsafe smoking environment.
10 fire safety citations on file: 3 on June 25, 2025, 6 on May 15, 2024, 1 on March 29, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 4, 2025 | Fine | $17,621 |
| February 27, 2025 | Fine | $71,152 |
| March 18, 2024 | Fine | $17,095 |
| November 7, 2023 | Fine | $204,685 |
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) | 3.06 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.26 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.70 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.71 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.09 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 44.3% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 20.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.62 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 3.20 on weekdays and 2.70 on weekends, 16% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.5% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.27 in April to June 2025 to 3.06 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 | 3.06 | 0.26 | 3.20 | 2.70 | 0.5% | 0 of 90 | 65 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.95 | 0.33 | 3.06 | 2.68 | 0.4% | 0 of 92 | 69 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.09 | 0.30 | 3.24 | 2.71 | 0.7% | 0 of 92 | 68 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.27 | 0.16 | 3.48 | 2.74 | 0.8% | 2 of 91 | 66 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Texas, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.33 | 0.40 | 3.50 | 2.93 | 2.2% | 0.7% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.03 | $16.97 to $20.71 | 88,680 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.92 | $27.46 to $32.89 | 57,560 |
| Registered nurses | $46.14 | $38.06 to $50.53 | 271,380 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Texas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.8 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.5 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.3 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.7 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| 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 | 1.8 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Port Arthur Nursing and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 51.5% · Texas: 116 better, 50 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 8 eligible stays.
10.7% 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. 35 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. 16 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. 7 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: 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. 13 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: 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. 13 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. 1 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 Cascades Healthcare, a group of 19 nursing homes averaging 2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liberty County Hospital District No 1 | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 12/01/2014 |
| Stratton, Charles | Corporate director | Individual | 12/01/2014 | |
| Lamplighter Operations, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2026 | |
| Ikerd, John | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2026 | |
| Christensen, Covey | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 05/11/2026 | |
| Hazel, Kelvin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2026 | |
| Jian, Peter | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2026 |
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.