Home / Texas / Sulphur Springs
1200 Jackson St. North, Sulphur Springs, TX 75482 · Hopkins County · (903) 885-6571
95 certified beds, about 68 residents a day · Government - Hospital district · Medicare and Medicaid since 1997
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675664 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 10, 2025, inspectors cited 15 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 57 health citations since July 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.36 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.67 of those hours.
44.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Opco Skilled Management, an affiliated group of 68 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 57 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure all drugs were stored in a locked compartment, only accessible by authorized personnel, and labeled and dated correctly for 1 of 5 medication carts (100-200 halls nurse's cart) and 3 of 8 residents (Residents #21, #11, and #39) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to ensure RN D secured the 100-200 hall nurse's cart when she left it unattended on 09/09/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure RN D properly secured Resident #21's insulin pen when she left it on top of the 100-200 hall nurse's cart on 09/09/25. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #11 did not have wound cleanser in his bedside drawer. 4. Medication aide failed to ensure Resident #39 took her morning medications prior leaving her room and not leaving the medications behind on 09/10/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 1 of 23 (Resident #11) residents and 1 of 3 meals (lunch) reviewed for palatability. The facility failed to provide palatable food served at an appetizing temperature or taste to Resident #11, who complained the food was cold and not good. The dietary staff failed to provide food that was palatable for the lunch meal observed on 09/10/25.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the arbitration agreement was explained in a form and manner, including a language the resident or representative understood for 3 of 3 residents (Residents #56, #57, and #70) reviewed for arbitration agreements. The facility failed to ensure the binding arbitration agreement was fully understood and explained to Residents #57, #70, and #56's responsible party, prior to signing it as part of the admission packet. These failures could place the residents or the residents' responsible parties in binding agreements not fully understood, have a loss of their legal rights, and cause negative psychological issues.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure the quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and others participating in the provision of care for 3 of 7 residents (Resident #8, Resident 11 and Resident #66) reviewed for hospice services. 1. The facility failed to maintain the hospice binder for Resident #8, which contained information related to the hospice services provided to the resident, including the most recent plan of care, hospice election form, medication list, and physician recertification. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 3 of 26 residents (Resident #66, Resident #11, and Resident #18), reviewed for infection control practices. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA O did not wear her gown and gloves out of Resident #66's room after providing direct care to Resident #66 who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP- an infection control strategy that uses gloves/gowns during high-contact resident care to reduce the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms) on 4/11/25.2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident had the right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or professional, of the risks and benefits of proposed care, of treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options and to choose the alternative or option he or she prefers. for 1 of 21 (Residents #60) residents reviewed for psychoactive medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #60 had signed a psychotropic consent for Remeron (antidepressant medication). This failure could place residents at risk for receiving unnecessary antipsychotic medications without informed consent.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to formulate an advanced directive was provided for 1 of 26 residents (Residents #13) reviewed for advanced directives. The facility did not ensure Resident #13 had a physician's order in his chart for DNR. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
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 includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs, for 1 of 26 (Resident 32) residents reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #32's comprehensive care plan addressed she received an IV antibiotic via her central line. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions to meet their current needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to conduct activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain grooming, personal, and oral hygiene were provided for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was showered or bed bathed during the dates of 09/01/25 through 09/10/25. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care/services, decreased quality of life, and loss of dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received proper treatment and assistive devices to maintain vision and hearing abilities, the facility must, if necessary, assist the resident in making appointments for 1 of 26 residents (Resident #51). The facility failed to ensure Resident #11 had his ketorolac eye drops by 08/31/25 to ensure he had his surgery on 09/02/25. This failure placed resident at risk of a delay in treatments for the residents' conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents environment remained free of accident hazards for 1 of 26 residents (Residents #11) reviewed for accident hazards. The facility failed to ensure a safe environment to prevent accidents and hazards for Residents #11 by not ensuring 3 razors (1 razor that did not have a cover over the blades and 2 razors in the open package) in his drawer were stored securely. This failure could place residents at risk for injuries.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible or resident preferences indicate otherwise for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for nutritional status (Resident #12). The facility failed to ensure Resident #12's enteral feeding (a form of nutrition that is delivered into the digestive system as a liquid form via the feeding tube) was administered as ordered by the physician on 09/08/25. This failure could place residents at risk for malnourishment, illness, skin breakdown, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had a physician's order for oxygen. This failure could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, 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 1 of 6 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #42 did not have duplicate orders for his potassium. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefits of prescribed medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide food and drink that accommodated the residents' preferences for 1 of 23 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for preferences. The facility did not honor Resident #1's preference for two milks with her breakfast on 09/09/25 and 09/10/25. This failure could result in a decrease in resident choices.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement written policies and procedures that prohibit mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of residents and establish policies and procedures to report and investigate such allegations, for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for abuse. The facility did not implement the policy on investigating an injury of unknown origin to the state agency for Resident #3 when Resident # 3 was found with bruising and a skin tear on 02/11/2025 on the left arm. This failure could place the residents at increased risk of abuse and neglect.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility staff did not report to the state agency that Resident #3 had a bruise and a skin tear to the left arm of unknown origin on 02/11/25. This failure could place the residents at increased risk for abuse and neglect or further potential abuse due to unreported allegations of abuse and neglect.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs, for 2 of 4 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) residents reviewed for the care plan. 1. The facility failed to ensure urinalysis results on 04/05/2025 for Resident #1's contact isolation was care planned on 04/06/2025 for a diagnosis of Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase, also known as ESBL (a bacteria that can be spread from person to person on contaminated hands of both patients and healthcare workers. 2. [...]
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 of 6 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure LVN D wore the proper PPE (gown and gloves) while checking Resident #1's blood sugar or administering insulin on 04/08/25, who was positive for ESBL. The facility failed to ensure CNA E wore the proper PPE (gown and gloves) while providing care to Resident #1, who was positive for ESBL on 04/09/25. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 understood contact isolation precautions when the resident was in activities with other residents and positive for MRSA on 04/08/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for 3 of 13 residents (Resident #1, #2 and Resident #3) reviewed for resident abuse. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #1 was free from abuse when Resident #3 struck Resident #1 on the shoulder 11/8/24. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #2 was free from abuse when Resident #4 reached out and grabbed Resident #2 under the arm on 12/9/24. 3. The facility did not ensure Resident #3 was free from abuse when Resident #5 pushed Resident #3 head on 12/9/24. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The past noncompliance began on 11/8/24 and ended on 12/14/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. 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 provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 3 residents (Residents #7) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #7 medications were administered during the scheduled time. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #7 was given Estrace Vaginal Cream 0.01 mg/gm as scheduled. 3. The facility did not ensure Resident #7 was given Vitamin B-12 2000 mcg. These failures could place the residents at risk of not having medications available for use, drug diversion, not receiving their medications as ordered, and exacerbation of their disease processes.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 2 (Resident #64, and Resident #78) of 24 residents reviewed for accuracy of MDS assessments. 1) The facility failed to ensure that Resident #64's MDS accurately reflected the resident had received antibiotics during the 7-day look back period. 2) The facility failed to ensure that Resident's #64's MDS accurately reflected the resident had a MRSA infection to his right hip. 3) The facility failed to ensure Resident #78's MDS accurately reflected his discharge from the facility. These failures could put residents at risk of not receiving the necessary care and services related to inaccurate MDS assessment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of activities based on the comprehensive assessment to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 2 (08/21/24 and 08/22/24) of 2 days reviewed for quality of life. The facility failed to ensure 4 of 8 scheduled activities were provided according to the August 2024 activity schedule on 08/21/2024 and 08/22/2024. This failure could place residents at risk for not having activities to meet their interests or needs and a decline in their physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be informed of and participate in his or her treatment which included, the right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or other professional, of the risks and benefits of proposed care, treatment, and treatment alternatives or treatment options to choose the alternative or option he or she preferred for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #179) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to obtain informed consent based on the information of the benefits and risks for Resident #179 before administering Bupropion HCL ER (Wellbutrin - a medication used to treat depression). This failure could place residents at risk of receiving medications they had not consented to, experiencing potential adverse reactions, and a potential decline in physical and mental health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to consult with the resident's physician immediately when there was a need to alter treatment significantly (that is, a need to discontinue an existing form of treatment due to adverse consequences, or to commence a new form of treatment) for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #33) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to notify Resident #33's physician when he refused his ordered lab draws for 4 weeks. This failure placed residents' physician at risk of not being aware of any changes in their conditions and could result in a delay in treatment and decline in residents' health and well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had a right to personal privacy and confidentiality of medical records for 1 (Resident #57) of 4 residents reviewed for resident rights The facility failed to ensure the ADON logged out of her computer and protected the privacy of Resident #57's Medication Administration Record. This failure could place residents at risk for low self-esteem, loss of dignity and decreased quality of life due to medication administration record being accessible to others.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures that prohibit mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of residents, for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to follow their policy to report neglect to HHSC when Resident #10's Family Member alleged that CNA C left Resident #10 in bed beyond soiled, and shaking and CNA C stated, I don't fool with her because she hits me. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse, neglect, physical harm, mental anguish, and emotional distress.
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 resulted in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that caused the allegation did not involve abuse and did not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including 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 1 of 24 residents (Residents # 10) reviewed for abuse and neglect. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered 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 for 1 of 24 residents (Residents #64) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop a care plan for Resident #64's diagnosis of MRSA (methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus) infection to the wound on his right hip. This failure could have placed resident at risk for not having their needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents requiring respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 oxygen cylinders reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure an oxygen cylinder was stored properly. This failure could place residents and staff at risk for accidents, leaks, and damage to the cylinder.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure dialysis services were provided consistently with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #33) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #33 had a physician's order for dialysis treatment. The facility failed to monitor Resident #33's dialysis catheter. These failures could place the residents, who received dialysis, at risk for complications and not receiving proper care and treatment to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary psychotropic drugs (without adequate behavior monitoring or side effects) for 1 (Resident #179) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary meds. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #179 had behavior monitoring for Bupropion HCL ER(Wellbutrin) and Sertraline (Zoloft) used for depression. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #179 had side effect monitoring for Clonazepam (Klonopin) used for anxiety. These failures could place residents at risk of possible medication side effects, adverse consequences, decreased quality of life, and dependence on unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure all drugs were only accessible by authorized personnel for 1 of 4 medication carts (hall 100). The facility did not ensure the 100 hall medication cart was secured and unable to be accessed by unauthorized personnel. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving drugs and biologicals as needed and a drug diversion.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and others participating in the provision of care for 3 of 4 residents (Residents #38, #31 and #8) reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed to obtain Resident #38's most recent plan of care, hospice election form, physician certification, and hospice medication list. The facility failed to obtain Resident #31's most recent updated hospice plan of care and hospice medication list. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's hospice medication orders reflected what Resident #8 was currently receiving at the facility. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 (Resident #64) of 24 residents reviewed for infection control practices and transmission-based precautions. 1) The facility failed to ensure Resident #64 was placed on (TBP) transmission-based isolation for MRSA infection to his right hip wound. 2) The facility failed to ensure CNAs received proper notification about the infection. These failures could place residents at increased risk for serious complications from a communicable disease that could diminish the resident's quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow their own established smoking policy for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #9) reviewed for smoking. The facility failed to follow the policy on smoking by not completing a smoking screen assessment quarterly on Resident #9. This failure could place residents at risk of unsafe smoking and injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals, to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 16 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. (Resident #1) The facility failed to ensure RN F, CMA G, and LVN C were able to account for the missing 30 count card of Resident #1's Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen 7.5-325mg tablet used for pain management. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased quality of life, misappropriation of property, misappropriation of physician ordered medications and dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and others participating in the provision of care for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #9) reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed to ensure Hospice Aide A performed a proper transfer when she failed to use a mechanical lift, as ordered by the physician and per Resident #9's care plan, to transfer Resident #9 from her wheelchair to her bed on 07/15/2024. This failure could place residents at risk for falls, injuries, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #2) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA D performed hand hygiene when she changed gloves while providing perineal care for Resident #2. This failure could place residents and staff at risk for cross contamination and the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 and Resident #2's restorative care program was included in their comprehensive care plans. These failures could place the residents at risk of not having their individual needs met, not receiving necessary services, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide residents with limited range of motion appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and to prevent further decrease in range of motion for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for range of motion. The facility failed to ensure CNA A provided restorative care to Resident #1 and Resident #2 according to their Nursing Restorative Care Program plan of care. These failures could place residents at risk of not attaining/or maintaining their highest level of physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 3 residents (Residents #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for infection control practices in that: CNA B did not ensure Resident #1 was cleansed of stool when she (CNA B) performed incontinent care. CNA C did not ensure Resident #2 was cleansed of stool when she (CNA C) performed incontinent care. CNA C did not remove her dirty gloves, perform hand hygiene (wash her hands or use hand sanitizer) and place clean gloves on before grabbing Resident #2's draw sheet during incontinent care. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained free of accident and hazards for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accident hazards in that: CNA D did not ensure Resident #1's bed was locked after providing care. This failure could place dependent residents at risk for falls, injuries and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to immediately consult the physician when there was a significant change in the resident's physical and mental status (that is, a deterioration in health, mental, or psychosocial status in either life-threatening conditions or clinical complications) for 1 of 13 residents (Resident #4) whose records were reviewed for change in condition. 1. The facility failed to notify Resident #4's physician when Resident #4 had an increase in bruising while taking an anticoagulant medication (blood thinner that works by preventing red blood cells from forming clots), which indicated a change of condition and resulted in a delay of treatment. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was identified on 07/13/23 at 9:30 AM. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 13 (Resident #4) residents reviewed for quality of care. 1. The facility failed to intervene when Resident #4, who was taking an anticoagulant medication (blood thinner that works by preventing red blood cells from forming clots), had increased bruising, which indicated a change of condition. 2. The facility did not ensure LVN L, who was the treatment nurse, accurately performed weekly skin assessments. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was identified on 07/13/23 at 9:30 AM. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment for 5 of 19 residents (Resident #16, Resident #19, Resident #21, Resident #40, and Resident #75) reviewed for environment. The facility failed to repair deep scrapes that exposed the sheetrock on the wall behind the head of the bed and on the wall next to the bed for Resident #16, Resident #19, Resident #21, and Resident #40. The facility failed to ensure Resident #75's bed linens were changed. This failure could place residents at risk for an uncomfortable, unhomelike environment, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident was informed before, or at the time of admission, and periodically during the residents stay, of services available in the facility and of changes for those services, which included changes for services not covered under Medicare/Medicaid or by the facility's per diem rate for 2 of 3 residents (Residents #9 and #129) reviewed for Medicare/Medicaid coverage. The facility failed to ensure Resident #9 and #129 was given a SNF ABN when discharged from skilled services at the facility prior to covered days being exhausted. This failure could place residents at risk for not being aware of changes to provided services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to implement written policies that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation for 1 of 19 (Resident #4) residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility did not implement their abuse and neglect policy and procedure when the staff did not report Resident #4's bruises of unknown source to the abuse coordinator. This failure could place the residents at increased risk for abuse and neglect.
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 no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, for 1 of 19 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility did not ensure facility staff reported bruising of unknown origin for Resident #4 to the abuse coordinator (Administrator). This failure could place the residents at increased risk for abuse and neglect.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review the facility failed to develop the baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #75) reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #75 had a baseline care plan completed within 48 hours of admission This failure could affect residents by not addressing their physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for each resident to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial outcome.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop or implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to meet resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 13 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #4) The facility did not implement Resident #4's care plan related to anticoagulant therapy. This failure could place residents at risk for inaccurate care plans and decreased quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan was reviewed by the interdisciplinary team and that the resident was invited to participate in developing the care plan and making decisions about his or her care for 1 of 19 residents (Resident #75) reviewed for care plan timing and revision. The facility failed to ensure Resident #75 was invited to participate in the development and review of his care plan. This failure could place residents at risk of not being able to attain or maintain their highest practicable level of physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents requiring respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practices for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #54 and Resident #75) reviewed for respiratory care. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #54 had a physician's order for oxygen that she wore continuously. 2. The facility failed to administer oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula as prescribed by the physician for Resident #75. These failures could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk for developing respiratory complications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who require dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #75) reviewed for dialysis. The facility failed to have physician's orders for the care of Resident #75's central venous catheter used for dialysis (a long, flexible tube inserted into a vein in your neck, chest, arm, or groin and leads to a large vein that empties into your heart and is used as a dialysis access). The facility failed to care plan Resident #75's central venous catheter used for dialysis. These failures could place residents at risk for complications and not receiving proper care and treatment to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that licensed nurses have the specific competencies and skill sets necessary to care for residents' needs, as identified through resident assessments, and described in the plan of care for 1 of 13 residents reviewed (Resident #4) for anticoagulant monitoring and skin assessments. 1. The facility did not ensure the physician orders for anticoagulant monitoring on Resident #4 were adequately followed, when Resident #4 had an increase in bruising while taking an anticoagulant medication (blood thinner that works by preventing red blood cells from forming clots). 2. The facility did not ensure LVN L, who was the treatment nurse, accurately performed weekly skin assessment's resulting in no documentation of Resident #4's bruising. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and others participating in the provision of care for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #68) reviewed for hospice services. The facility did not ensure Resident #68's hospice records were a part of their records in the facility This deficient practice could place residents who receive hospice services at-risk of receiving inadequate end-of-life care due to a lack of documentation, coordination of care and communication of resident needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 6 staff (NA H) reviewed for infection control. The facility did not ensure NA H performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #26. The facility did not ensure NA H cleaned Resident #26 peri-anal area before placing a clean brief underneath her. These failures could place residents and staff at risk for cross-contamination and the spread of infection.
2 fire safety citations on file: 1 on August 22, 2024, 1 on July 14, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.36 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.67 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.08 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.21 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.48 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 44.9% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 36.4% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.49 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.47 on weekdays and 3.08 on weekends, 11% 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 2.77 in April to June 2025 to 3.36 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 | 3.36 | 0.67 | 3.47 | 3.08 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 68 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.17 | 0.52 | 3.29 | 2.85 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 68 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.10 | 0.59 | 3.23 | 2.78 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 72 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.77 | 0.35 | 2.89 | 2.47 | 0.3% | 0 of 91 | 75 |
| 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 | 16.0 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.3 | 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 | 9.6 | 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 | 11.6 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 23.2 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.9 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.3 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Sunny Springs Nursing & Rehab's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (44.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
44.0% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Texas: 116 better, 50 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 35 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. 63 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. 31 eligible stays.
68.0% this home
Median of homes: Texas57.3% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 25 residents counted.
2.6% this home
Median of homes: Texas0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 39 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Texas1.3% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 39 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Texas98.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 7 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. CMS links this home to Opco Skilled Management, a group of 68 nursing homes averaging 2.3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nocona Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 03/01/2015 |
| Meekins, Greg | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2015 | |
| Sulphur Springs Healthcare LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 03/01/2015 | |
| Garetz, David | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2020 | |
| Petry, Stephanie | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/03/2023 | |
| Petty, Jared | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/25/2025 | |
| Kaplan, Esther | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2025 | |
| Kaplan, Mordechai | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/10/2025 | |
| Mindle, Adam | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2025 | |
| Unger, Jeffrey | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2025 | |
| 1200 Jackson Street North, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/28/2017 | |
| Continuum Rehab Group LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/28/2017 | |
| Kgss Realty, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/28/2017 | |
| Larchmont Realty, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/28/2017 | |
| Montgomery Sky Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/28/2017 | |
| Opco Ca Skilled Mgmt Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/28/2017 | |
| Opco Texas Skilled Mgmt LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/28/2017 | |
| Gurwitz, Solomon | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/28/2017 | |
| Petry, Stephanie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/03/2023 | |
| Petty, Jared | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/25/2025 |
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.