330 W Camp Wisdom Rd, Duncanville, TX 75116 · Dallas County · (972) 298-3398
103 certified beds, about 61 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1999
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675806 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 4, 2026, inspectors cited 4 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 23 health citations since September 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (3 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $38,522 in the last three years; the largest was $14,901, and the latest is dated January 27, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.20 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.30 of those hours.
55.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Paramount Healthcare, an affiliated group of 8 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility to ensure the residents had a right to secure and confidential personal and medical records for one (Residents #1) of 6 residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure MA A did not leave the computer tablet unlocked on top of a medication cart which disclosed Residents #1's EMAR on 06/22/26 from 10:05 am to 10:06 am. This failure could place residents at risk of embarrassment, feelings of vulnerability, and a decline in health and psycho-social well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or resident's representative(s) of the transfer or discharge and the reasons for the move in writing and in a language and manner they understand and send a copy of the notice to a representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for 3 of 6 residents (Resident #7, Resident #8, and Resident #77) reviewed for discharge planning. The facility failed to notify the residents or the residents' representative or POA of the transfer or discharge with the reasons for the move in writing in a language and manner they understand for Resident #7, Resident #8, and Resident #77. The facility failed to send a copy of the notice of transfer or discharge to the representative of the Office of the State LTC Ombudsman involving Resident #7, Resident #8, and Resident #77. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food safety reviewed for food safety. The facility failed to ensure that only disposable paper towels were disposed of in the garbage receptacle at handwashing sink #1. The facility failed to ensure that stored canned goods had uncompromised seals and were free from dents. These failures could place residents at risk for food-borne illness, cross contamination, and infection. During an observation on 06/03/2026 at 11:22 a.m., of the #1 handwashing sink's garbage receptacle the following was revealed: #1 handwashing sinks garbage receptacles contained items other than disposable paper towels, including used gloves, and plastic wrapping. [...]
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 three (Residents #4, #19, and #42) of 5 residents reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 was not exposed to Resident #19 (roommate) who was treated for MRSA infection. The facility failed to ensure CNA A changed gloves and performed hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident #42. This failure could place residents at risk of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to refer all level II residents and all residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition for level II resident review upon a significant change in status assessment for one (Residents #12) of 8 residents reviewed for PASSR. The facility failed to refer Resident #12, who had mental illness, to the state designated service for review. This failure could place residents at risk of missed PASSR services.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to personal privacy and confidentiality of his or her personal and medical records for 4 (Residents #1, #2, #3, and #4) of 10 residents reviewed for personal privacy. The facility failed to protect the personal information of Residents #1, # 2, #3, and #4, by placing their personal information such as their name, date of birth , social security number, Medicare number, Medicaid number, address, and phone numbers for contacts in the Elopement Binder by the facility's front door. This failure could place residents at risk of identity theft and loss of private information.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 of 6 residents (Residents #1) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan included a diagnosis of Pneumonia. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the care and services to maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one of three residents (Resident #2) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to add Resident #2 to the infection control log when he was diagnosed with Pneumonia on 03/15/25. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk for infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's only kitchen reviewed for food safety. 1. The facility failed to ensure dented cans were placed in a separate storage area. 2. The facility failed to ensure food items were labeled and dated with the preparation date or discard by date. These failures could place residents at risk for food-borne illness and cross contamination. Findings Include: Observation of the dry storage on 03/31/2025 at 7:50am revealed the following: -1 4lbs can of tuna received date 3/29/2025 was dented on top right. -1 4lbs can of tuna received date 3/29/2025 was dented on front. [...]
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 2 of 2 (MA A and CNA B) staff members and 4 of 4 residents (Residents #4, #30, #54, and #31) reviewed for infection control procedures. MA A failed to disinfect the blood pressure cuff in between blood pressure checks for Residents #4 and #30. CNA B failed to change their soiled gloves and perform hand hygiene during incontinent care on Residents #54 and #31. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, including injuries of unknown source 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 (including to the State Survey Agency where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities) in accordance with State law through established procedures for one (Resident #179) of five residents reviewed for injury of unknown origin reporting. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed, in response to allegations of neglect, have evidence that all alleged violations were thoroughly investigated and report the results of all investigations to the administrator and to other officials in accordance with State law, including the State Survey Agency, within 5 working days of the incident for 1 of 5 (Resident #179) residents reviewed for abuse, neglect, and exploitation investigations. The facility failed to investigate an injury of unknown origin sustained by Resident #179 that was suspicious of abuse or neglect. This failure could cause diminished quality of life and place residents at risk for mistreatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, 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 2 of 4 residents (Residents #44 and #30) reviewed for nutritional status. MA A administered nutritional supplement to Resident #44, who was interviewable but moderately confused and unable to make decision for herself, without a physician's order. MA administered nutritional supplement to Resident # 30, who was interviewable moderately confused and unable to make decisions for herself, without a physician's order. This failure could result in residents not having an accurate overall view of their care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for one (Resident #1) resident of three residents reviewed for elopement. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was adequately supervised to prevent him from leaving the facility unsupervised on 01/13/2025. Resident #1 had unspecified dementia, other lack of coordination and wore a wander guard. Resident #1 eloped from the facility without anyone noticing him or hearing the wander guard alarm system go off. Resident #1 was located between the facility's white fence and the home next door approximately 10-15 feet from the facility's nearest exit door. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 01/13/2025 and ended on 01/13/2025. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to immediately notify the resident's responsible party consistent with his or her authority, when there was an accident involving the resident which results in injury and has the potential for requiring physician intervention for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for notification of changes. LVN D failed to promptly notify Resident #2's responsible party when an injury of unknown origin was discovered on Resident #2's face during the evening on 01/18/2025. Resident #2's responsible party was not made aware of the injury of unknown origin until she arrived at the facility to visit the next day on 01/19/2025. Resident #2 was transferred back to the Hospice In-House Unit where she was diagnosed with a hematoma (collection of blood that has accumulated outside of blood vessels in a localized area). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure resident was free from abuse and neglect for 1(Resident # 2) of 10 residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. 1. The facility failed to protect Resident # 2 from physical abuse by CNA F. Resident #2 was aggressively respositioned and hit twice in the face with an opened hand and closed fist by CNA F. Resident #2 grimaced after being hit twice in the face by CNA F. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse, injury, and emotional distress. The noncompliance was identified at PNC. The noncompliance began on 5/15/2024 and ended on 5/15/2024. CNA F was arrested by law enforcement and terminated immediately. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible and that residents received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for one (Resident #1) resident of three residents reviewed for elopement. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was adequately supervised to prevent her from leaving the facility unsupervised. Resident #1 had severely cognitive impairment and lacked safety awareness. Resident #1 eloped from the facility rolling in her wheelchair across a four-lane busy residential street arriving at the fire station across the street 50 yards away. It was determined these failures placed Resident #1 in a non-compliance Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation from 07/01/24-07/02/24. The facility corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient nursing staff with appropriate competencies and skills set to provide nursing and related services for 1 (CNA F) of 11 employees reviewed for staff qualifications. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA F had a current nurse aide certification while employed at the facility while actively providing care for residents. This failure could result in residents being provided care by staff who have not provided documentation of training and competency in providing care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment and the services that were to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for one of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. 1. The facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan for Resident #1 was developed to accurately address the resident's need for dining assistance. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's bed was in the lowest position possible as noted in the care plan while the resident was lying in bed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident's environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for one of five residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's bed was in the lowest position possible while the resident was lying in bed. Resident #1 was noted to be at risk for falls. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for falls and could contribute to avoidable falls, resulting in injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to promptly notify the ordering physician, physician assistant, nurse practitioner, or clinical nurse specialist of results that fall outside of clinical reference ranges in accordance with facility policies and procedures for notification of a practitioner or per the ordering physician's orders for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for radiology services. The facility failed to retrieve x-ray results for Resident #1's shoulder in a timely manner. This failure could place residents at risk of injury, pain and a delay in treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, observation and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen. The Facility failed to ensure food in the facility's refrigerator was discarded by the use by date according to the facility guidelines. This failure could place residents who receive food prepared in the facility kitchen at an increased risk of exposure to food born illness. Findings Included: Observation on 02/20/2024 at 9:40 am revealed in the walk-in refrigerator a rolling cart, with a tray containing 12 small cups of cheese with use by 02/17/2024 dates on them. Observation on 02/22/2024 at 11:30 am revealed in the walk in refrigerator a salad sitting on a rolling cart with a use by date of 02/21/2024 sitting with other salads. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that medications were secure and inaccessible to unauthorized staff and residents for 2 (one medication cart for Hall 100 and one medication cart for Hall 500) of 5 medication carts and two medication rooms reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure medication supplies were all stored in locked compartments and permit only authorized personnel to have keys, when MA A's one medication cart for Hall 100, was left unlocked an unattended by MA A. The facility failed to ensure medication supplies were all stored in locked compartments and permit only authorized personnel to have keys when MA B's one medication cart for Hall 500 was left unlocked and unattended by MA B. [...]
17 fire safety citations on file: 3 on June 4, 2026, 3 on April 2, 2025, 11 on February 22, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| January 27, 2025 | Fine | $14,508 |
| December 30, 2024 | Fine | $9,113 |
| December 30, 2024 | Fine | $14,901 |
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) | 3.20 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.30 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.93 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.93 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.97 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 55.6% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 33.3% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.50 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 3.31 on weekdays and 2.93 on weekends, 11% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 2.69 in April to June 2025 to 3.20 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 | 3.20 | 0.30 | 3.31 | 2.93 | 1.1% | 0 of 90 | 61 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.23 | 0.25 | 3.35 | 2.93 | 0.8% | 0 of 92 | 60 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 2.97 | 0.23 | 3.07 | 2.71 | 0.6% | 0 of 92 | 65 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.69 | 0.21 | 2.80 | 2.43 | 1.4% | 0 of 91 | 72 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Texas, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.33 | 0.40 | 3.50 | 2.93 | 2.2% | 0.7% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.03 | $16.97 to $20.71 | 88,680 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.92 | $27.46 to $32.89 | 57,560 |
| Registered nurses | $46.14 | $38.06 to $50.53 | 271,380 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Texas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 25.6 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.8 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.1 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.1 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Laurenwood Nursing and Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (62.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
62.5% 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. 41 eligible stays.
10.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Texas: 0 better, 9 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 40 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. 21 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. 8 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 25 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. 25 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. 10 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: HAMILTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Paramount Healthcare, a group of 8 nursing homes averaging 3.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dkp Investments, LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 04/01/2023 | |
| Pln Ltd. | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 04/01/2023 | |
| Port Au Prince LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 04/01/2023 | |
| Prince, Danny | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Hooper, Grady | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Dkp Investments, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2023 | |
| Duncanville Nursing, Ltd | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2023 | |
| Golden, Lauren | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Miller, Marquisha | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Prince, Danny | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Dkp Investments, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2023 | |
| Duncanville Nursing, Ltd | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/22/2025 | |
| Pln Ltd. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2023 | |
| Port Au Prince LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2023 | |
| Brown, Deandre | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Miller, Marquisha | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Prince, Danny | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2023 |
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.