701 N Sarah Dewitt, Gonzales, TX 78629 · Gonzales County · (830) 672-4530
132 certified beds, about 93 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2007
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676138 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 27, 2026, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
None of its 23 health citations since October 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.25 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.27 of those hours.
44.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Touchstone Communities, an affiliated group of 25 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 23 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to maintain medical records that were complete and accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for medical records. The facility nurses did not document accurately on Resident #1's Medication Administration Record on 07/15/2026 regarding the resident's [NAME] Hose (medical stockings used to help prevent blood clots in people who are not moving much). This failure could place residents at risk for records not accurately documented.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 1 (near Activities Area) of 2 kitchenettes reviewed, in that: The door to kitchenette #1 was open and unlocked; the steam table was on and hot to the touch, and the refrigerator held a gallon container of milk and three trays with approximately 40 glasses of liquid marked to be served at lunchtime. No staff were present in the kitchenette or within the surrounding area. This deficient practice could result in residents coming into contact with a hot surface, and/or consuming liquids of the incorrect texture for their diet, and/or contaminating the food and drinks in the refrigerator.
Inspectors wroteNumber of residents sampled:Number of residents cited:The findings included: Record review of Resident #76's face sheet, dated 03/26/2026, reflected a [AGE] year old female who was originally admitted on [DATE] with current admission date 01/20/2026 with diagnoses including Low Vision Right Eye Category 2 (severe visual impairment), Tubulo-interstitial Nephritis (a type of inflammation that damages the tubules in the kidneys and the tissue that surrounds them), Spinal Stenosis (narrowing in the spine which puts pressure on nerves and spinal cord), Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Hyperglycemia (the body can't use insulin properly and/or doesn't make enough insulin resulting in high blood sugar levels), Essential Hypertension (high blood pressure), Uninhibited Neuropathic Bladder (a type of bladder dysfunction caused by brain or upper spinal cord damage), and Other Obstructive and Reflux [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences in 1 (Resident #50) of 3 residents reviewed receiving supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #50's oxygen tubing was stored properly to prevent contamination. Resident 50's oxygen tubing was on the floor in her room with nasal cannula resting on metal bed frame under headboard. This failure could put residents receiving supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula at risk for cross-contamination and respiratory infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's Zyrtec (Cetirizine) an allergy medication had a dosage ordered on MARS. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic effects of their prescribed medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were secured properly for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #23) reviewed for medication storage, in that: The facility failed to ensure medication Vick's (nasal decongestant) was not left on Resident #23's bedside table. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of their medications as ordered.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that met his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs, taking into consideration the preferences of each resident for 8 of 35 days for the Fall/Winter 2025 menu. This facility failed to ensure their menu met the nutritional needs of residents in accordance with established national guidelines. This failure could place residents at risk for a decline in health status due to inadequate or inappropriate nutritional intake.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had a right to personal privacy for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for resident rights, in that: The facility failed to ensure CNA A and LVN B completely closed Resident #3's privacy curtain while providing incontinent care. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk of loss of dignity due to lack of privacy.
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 disease and infection for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #88) observed for nursing care and 3 of 19 (residents #10, #88 and #89) reviewed for infection control, in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA E washed or sanitized her hands or changed her gloves, before touching the resident #88's clean brief and after touching the soiled resident's chuck and brief. 2. The facility failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were implemented or used while staff provided high-contact resident activities, including: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments for 2 of 18 residents (Residents #30 and #59) reviewed for care plans. 1. The facility failed to revise Resident #30's comprehensive care plan to reflect the resident's change in cognitive status. 2. The facility failed to revise Resident #59's comprehensive care plan to reflect the resident's discontinued use of anti-depressant medication. These deficient practices could cause confusion for staff members responsible for providing direct care for residents and medication administration and place residents at risk of receiving improper care.
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 5 residents (Resident #62) reviewed for incontinent care, in that: The facility failed to ensure CNA C thoroughly cleaned Resident #62 while providing incontinent care. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk for infection and skin break down due to improper care practices.
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 personnnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 4 medication carts ([NAME] Unit Nurse's medication cart) reviewed for storage. The facility failed to ensure LVN-F secured Resident #62's Fiasp Insulin, when it was left unattended on top of the Nurses medication cart. This failure could place residents at risk for drug diversion and accidents and hazards.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to properly store a 16-oz. bag of chips in the dry storage room. This failure could place residents who received meals and/or snacks from the kitchen at risk for food borne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed a to dispose of garbage and refuse properly for 1 of 2 Dumpsters (Dumpster #1) reviewed for disposal of garbage. The facility failed to ensure the sliding doors on both sides of the dumpster was completely closed. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for exposure to germs and diseases carried by vermin and rodents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who needed respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the residents goals and preferences for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #6, #7 and #8) reviewed for respiratory care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6's oxygen tubing was not on the floor. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's oxygen tubing was not on the floor. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's nasal canula was not on the floor. These deficient practices could place residents at risk of receiving incorrect or inadequate oxygen support, possible contamination/cross contamination/infection and could result in a decline in health.
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 disease and infection for 3 of 10 residents (Residents #81, #93 and, #31) reviewed for infection control, in that: 1. Medication Aide F did not sanitize the blood pressure cuff between Resident #81 and Resident #93 2. While providing incontinent care for Resident #31, CNA G did not wash her hands after touching the trash can and, LVN H did not change her gloves or wash her hands before touching a pair of clean briefs These failures could place residents at-risk for infection due to improper care practices.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents have a right to personal privacy for 2 of 7 residents (Residents #2 and #56) reviewed for privacy, in that: 1. CNA A and CNA B did not close Resident #2's window curtain while providing incontinent care for the resident. 2 LVN M did not completely close Resident #56's privacy curtain while providing wound care for the resident. These failures could place residents at-risk of loss of dignity due to lack of privacy.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to report alleged violations related to neglect or abuse, including injuries of unknown source, are reported immediately, but not later than 24 hours after the allegation is made to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency), for 1 of 39 residents (Resident #9) reviewed for abuse and neglect, in that: The facility failed to report to the State Survey agency (HHSC) when Resident #9 alleged a dietary cook hit her on the arm on 08/16/2023. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse and neglect.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 27 residents (Resident #81) whose assessments were reviewed, in that: Resident #81's Annual MDS incorrectly documented the resident as receiving an insulin injection. This failure could place residents at-risk for inadequate care due to inaccurate assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to revise the comprehensive person-centered care plan to reflect the current condition for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #86) reviewed for care plan revisions The facility failed to update Resident #86's care plan to reflect his risk for elopement This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions to meet their current needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were accurately documented for 1 of 39 Residents (Resident #302) reviewed for medical records, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #302's Full Code status was included in his physician orders. This failures could place residents at risk for improper care due to inaccurate records.
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 1 (Resident #47) reviewed for hospice services, in that: The facility failed to obtain Resident #47's most recent hospice Plan of Care, Hospice Election Form and Physician Certification of Terminal Illness. This failure could place the resident who received 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, through past non-compliance, to implement an intervention to reduce the risk of a fall for 1 of 17 Residents (Resident #1) in that: Resident #1 sustained a fall with injuries while being transferred by CNA-C who did not use a gait belt during the resident transfer. This failure could place residents at risk for their safety needs not being met with unsafe transfers.
11 fire safety citations on file: 3 on March 27, 2026, 4 on December 13, 2024, 4 on October 20, 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) | 3.25 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.27 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.77 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.27 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.71 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 44.9% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 50.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.67 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 3.44 on weekdays and 2.77 on weekends, 19% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 2.85 in April to June 2025 to 3.25 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 | 3.25 | 0.27 | 3.44 | 2.77 | 0.8% | 0 of 90 | 93 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.14 | 0.23 | 3.32 | 2.70 | 1.5% | 1 of 92 | 89 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.13 | 0.23 | 3.30 | 2.70 | 1.1% | 0 of 92 | 90 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.85 | 0.27 | 3.00 | 2.49 | 2.0% | 1 of 91 | 99 |
| 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.
Trains nurse aides: this home runs a state-approved CNA program (state list: HHSC Approved NATCEP Providers, as of October 6, 2026). A nursing home cannot charge aides it employs, or has offered a job, for state-approved training (42 CFR 483.152(c)). See The Heights of Gonzales CNA training on CareerFunded, our sister site for career training.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.03 | $16.97 to $20.71 | 88,680 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.92 | $27.46 to $32.89 | 57,560 |
| Registered nurses | $46.14 | $38.06 to $50.53 | 271,380 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Texas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.3 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.7 | 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 | 4.7 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.8 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 20.0 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.3 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.3 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Heights of Gonzales's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (56.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
56.5% 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. 60 eligible stays.
10.5% 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. 77 eligible stays.
6.4% 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. 40 eligible stays.
37.8% 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. 37 residents counted.
5.8% 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. 52 residents counted.
4.9% 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. 52 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: GONZALES HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS. CMS links this home to Touchstone Communities, a group of 25 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gonzales Healthcare Systems | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 12/31/2013 |
| Keybank National Association | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 07/01/2021 | |
| Anzaldua, Brandon | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/01/2023 | |
| Touchstone Strategies - Go LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/31/2013 | |
| Boening, Christopher | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/13/2020 | |
| Campbell, Leslie | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2020 | |
| Castillo, Lynnea | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/31/2013 | |
| Dyer, Roger | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/20/2015 | |
| Hisey, Commie | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/10/2017 | |
| Johnson, Teri | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Sehlke, Bryon | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/16/2016 | |
| Zurovec, Darrell | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/01/2017 | |
| Aegis Therapies, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/31/2013 | |
| Carvajal Pharmacy LTC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/31/2013 | |
| Nutritious Lifestyles, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/31/2013 | |
| Plante & Moran PLLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/31/2013 | |
| Touchstone Communities Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/31/2013 | |
| Touchstone Realty - Gonzales, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/31/2013 | |
| Touchstone Strategies - Go LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/23/2025 | |
| Trident Health Services Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/31/2013 | |
| Boening, Christopher | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/13/2020 | |
| Campbell, Leslie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2020 | |
| Castillo, Lynnea | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/31/2013 | |
| Dyer, Roger | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/20/2015 | |
| Fellbaum, Ernest | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/31/2013 | |
| Hisey, Commie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/10/2017 | |
| Johnson, Teri | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Sehlke, Bryon | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/16/2016 | |
| Studer, Stanley | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/31/2013 | |
| Zurovec, Darrell | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/01/2017 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Texas. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.