4949 Ravenswood Drive, San Antonio, TX 78227 · Bexar County · (210) 568-5100
80 certified beds, about 56 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare since 2005
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676041 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 11, 2025, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 25 health citations since April 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $17,345 in the last three years; the largest was $17,345, and the latest is dated January 3, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.87 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.80 of those hours.
57.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
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 25 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a care plan to meet the resident's needs for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan accurately documented the resident's need for supervision when actively eating/drinking. These failures could place residents at risk of their needs not being met.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, that were complete; and accurately documented for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for documentation. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's nurse progress notes accurately documented when the resident's vitals were taken. These failures could place residents at risk of their records not accurately documenting interventions, monitoring, and information provided to the interdisciplinary team.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately inform the resident, consult with the resident's physician, and notify, consistent with his or her authority, the resident representatives when there was a significant change in resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for physician notification of changes in condition. The facility failed to notify Resident #17's physician when his blood sugar levels were out of physician ordered parameters on 6/25/2025. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not receiving adequate and timely intervention and a decline in condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #151) reviewed for enteral feeding: The facility failed to ensure Resident #151's medications were diluted before administering the medications into the resident's feeding tube, did not label the resident's feeding formula and water containers with the appropriate identifiers and did not discard the feeding containers after the feeding was completed. This deficient practice could place residents who received enteral nutrition and medications at increased risk of aspiration, infection, bloating discomfort, and not receiving the full benefit of the medications administered.
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 (Resident #17) of 3 residents reviewed for medications. The facility failed to stock an emergency supply of Lispro (fast-acting insulin) to maintain Resident #17's medical condition during a medication absence resulting in a blood sugar level of 386. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving therapeutic doses of their medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on the interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that 1 of 2 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for medication errors was free of any significant medication errors. The facility failed to administer Resident #17's insulin Lispro medication (a quick acting medication used to lower blood sugar) as prescribed. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of inadequate therapeutic outcomes, increased adverse side effects, and a decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 5 (memory unit) satellite kitchens. The facility failed to ensure dietary staff used facial hair restraints properly during plate preparation. 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 to immediately consult with the resident's physician when there was a significant change in resident condition for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for physician notification of changes in condition. The facility failed to notify Resident #1's physician when his blood sugar levels were out of physician ordered parameters on 3/07/2025, 3/10/2025, 3/13/2025 and 3/14/2025. This deficient practice could affect residents with a change of condition and result in not receiving adequate and timely intervention and a decline in condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accuracy of records, in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's 2:00 a.m. blood glucose readings were documented in his medical record on 2/24/2025, 2/27/2025, 3/02/2025, 3/03/2025, 3/04/2025 and 3/07/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's hospital stay from 2/11/2025-2/17/2025 were uploaded into his medical record. These failures could put residents at risk of resident medical records containing incomplete and/orinaccurate information affecting care.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment, and describes services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan was individualized specifically for to meet the resdient's needs for the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus based on physician order. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for not receiving proper care and services due to incomplete care plans.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices, for 1 of 13 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for diabetic medical interventions. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had supporting orders for his diagnosis of diabetes mellitus upon admission to the facility from the hospital on [DATE] and led to Resident #1 not being assessed for daily blood sugar levels for the months of June 2024, August 2024, and September 2024, resulting on 10/18/2024, a hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c, a blood test that shows what your average blood sugar level was over the past two to three months) lab level of 9.9% (A1c normal level below 5.7; diabetes level = 6.5 or higher) and a finger stick blood sugar assessments of 300 at 06: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the facility did not use verbal, mental, sexual, or physical abuse, corporal punishment, or involuntary seclusion for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for abuse, neglect, and or exploitation. The facility failed to ensure residents were free from physical abuse on 09/30/2024, while Resident #2 was laying on her bed CNA H placed a pillow over Resident #2's face and stated, Pillow Therapy! The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The noncompliance began on 09/30/2024 and ended on 10/01/2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk for harm by abuse.
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 needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment, and services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 8 residents (Resident #12, Resident #28, and Resident #44) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Residents #12, #28 and #44 care plans reflected their need or placement on a secured memory care unit. This deficient practice places residents at risk for not receiving proper care and services due to inaccurate care plans.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #12) reviewed for enteral feeding tubes in that: LVN C did not check for residual volume prior to medication administration, did not flush the enteral feeding tube per physician's orders and administered the flush and medications with the syringe plunger instead of via gravity flow to Resident #12. These deficient practices could place residents receiving enteral nutrition and medications at increased risk of aspiration, infection, bloating discomfort, and not receiving the full benefit of the medications administered.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 4 of 8 residents (Residents #12, #28, #33, and #44) reviewed for accuracy of medical records. Facility failed to ensure Residents #12, #28, #33 and #44 had physician orders for admission to the locked memory care unit. This deficient practice could affect residents whose records are maintained by the facility and could place them at risk for errors in care and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' right to formulate an advance directive for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for advanced directives, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #10's Out-of-Hospital Do Not Resuscitate (OOH DNR) was dated and had the physician's license number which made the document invalid. This failure could place residents at-risk of having their end of life wishes dishonored, and of having CPR performed against their wishes.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to respect the residents' right to confidentiality in his or her personal and medical records for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #14) reviewed for residents' rights, in that: The facility failed to ensure LVN E locked the Medication Cart Computer screen and left Resident #14's information exposed. This failure could place residents at risk of resident-identifiable information being accessed by unauthorized persons.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 7 Residents (Resident #54) whose MDS records were reviewed for accuracy. Resident #54's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] incorrectly documented the resident was discharged to a Short-term hospital. This failure could place residents at risk for inadequate care due to inaccurate assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible for 2 of 8 residents (Resident #4 and Resident #28) reviewed for accidents and hazards in that: Facility failed to ensure Resident #4, and Resident #28 did not have disposable razors left on bathroom counters. This failure could place residents at risk of harm or injury and contribute to avoidable accidents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and include the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions and were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 2 of 7 medication carts (Household Treatment Cart and Household Medication Cart) reviewed for storage of drugs. 1. The facility failed to ensure the Household Treatment cart was locked and secured when it was left unattended. 2. The facility failed to ensure a change of direction label was used after the medication orders had changed for a medication package prescribed to Resident #46 in the Household Medication Cart. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of medication misuse and diversion.
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 7 residents (Resident #12 and #18) reviewed for infection control practices, in that: 1. LVN C did not sanitize or wash her hands between glove changes and turned off the water faucet after washing her hands which contaminated her hands prior to administering medications to Resident #12. 2. RN F used gloves from her pocket to administer a pain patch to Resident #18. These deficient practices could place residents who receive medications at risk of infection or a decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary treatment and services, based on the comprehensive assessment and consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent development of pressure injuries for 1 of 15 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for wound care in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure prompt wound care when a new wound to Resident #1's left and right lower leg was discovered on 11/21/23. The Wound Care Nurse D was first notified of the wounds on 11/28/23. 2. While performing Resident #1's left heel and right lower extremity wound care on 2/27/24, Wound Care Nurse D did not perform Resident #1's wound care as ordered by the physician. This deficient practice could affect residents who receive wound care and place them at risk for delayed wound healing.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure their medication error rate was not 5 percent or greater and had a medication error rate of 38.46 percent with 26 medications administration opportunities observed with 10 errors for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #26) and 1 of 4 staff (LVN B) reviewed for medication administration in that: 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to promote care for residents in a manner and in an environment that maintained or enhanced dignity and respect for 2 of 8 Residents (Resident #15 and Resident#25) reviewed for resident rights in that: 1. Resident #15's indwelling urinary catheter bag was not covered. 2. Resident #25's indwelling urinary catheter bag was not covered. These deficient practices could affect residents who had indwelling urinary catheters by contributing to poor self-esteem, lack of information, and unmet 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 to help prevent the development and transmission of infections for 1 of 24 residents (Residents #15) and 1 of 5 staff (LVN C) reviewed for infection control, in that: 1. LVN C did not sanitizer the scissors prior to cutting a bandage during wound care for Resident #15. 2. LVN C used the same paper towel to turn off the sink faucet and dry her hands prior to wound care for Resident #15. These deficient practices could place residents who receive wound care at-risk for infections.
4 fire safety citations on file: 3 on July 11, 2025, 1 on April 7, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| January 3, 2025 | Fine | $17,345 |
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) | 4.87 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.80 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.97 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.72 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.35 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 57.6% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 50.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.23 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 5.24 on weekdays and 3.97 on weekends, 24% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 5.2% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 5.94 in April to June 2025 to 4.87 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 | 4.87 | 0.80 | 5.24 | 3.97 | 5.2% | 0 of 90 | 56 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 5.15 | 0.77 | 5.50 | 4.28 | 2.9% | 0 of 92 | 53 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 5.29 | 0.89 | 5.67 | 4.33 | 5.7% | 0 of 92 | 47 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 5.94 | 0.94 | 6.38 | 4.84 | 11.6% | 0 of 91 | 46 |
| 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 | 8.8 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.8 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.4 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.8 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 7.6 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.7 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Mission at Blue Skies of Texas East's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (65.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
65.0% this home
Better than 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. 161 eligible stays.
8.5% 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. 191 eligible stays.
8.0% 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. 110 eligible stays.
51.6% 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. 93 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. 123 residents counted.
0.9% 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. 123 residents counted.
95.4% this home
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. 65 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: BST HEALTH SERVICES CORP.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biery, Diane | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Bryan, Helen | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/09/2023 | |
| Dubensky, Michael | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Flowers, Alfred | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2022 | |
| Hansen, Roger | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2021 | |
| Hepburn, Deborah | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Hostage, Katherine | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/01/2016 | |
| Kardys, Richard | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Kruger, Robert | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/09/2023 | |
| Meigs, Stephen | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/09/2023 | |
| Moran, Joseph | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/09/2023 | |
| Olsen, Janice | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2017 | |
| Potter, Charles | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Profenna, Leonardo | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2018 | |
| Schnelzer, Gary | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Biery, Diane | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Bryan, Helen | Corporate director | Individual | 11/09/2023 | |
| Dubensky, Michael | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Flowers, Alfred | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2022 | |
| Hansen, Roger | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2021 | |
| Hepburn, Deborah | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Hostage, Katherine | Corporate director | Individual | 11/01/2016 | |
| Kardys, Richard | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Kruger, Robert | Corporate director | Individual | 11/09/2023 | |
| Meigs, Stephen | Corporate director | Individual | 11/09/2023 | |
| Moran, Joseph | Corporate director | Individual | 11/09/2023 | |
| Olsen, Janice | Corporate director | Individual | 05/01/2017 | |
| Potter, Charles | Corporate director | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Profenna, Leonardo | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2018 | |
| Schnelzer, Gary | Corporate director | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Jones, Darrell | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/14/2018 | |
| Lyons, Amy | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Manzke, Sarah | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/01/2023 | |
| Ransom, Heather | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Air Force Village Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2011 | |
| Bst Health Services Corp | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2011 | |
| Goswami, Sushanta | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/13/2025 | |
| Jones, Darrell | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/18/2024 | |
| Kelly-Rank, Sally | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/19/2024 | |
| Lyons, Amy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/18/2024 | |
| Manzke, Sarah | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/19/2024 | |
| Ransom, Heather | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/19/2024 | |
| Air Force Village Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/22/2025 | |
| Biery, Diane | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Bryan, Helen | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Dubensky, Michael | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Flowers, Alfred | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Goswami, Sushanta | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Hansen, Roger | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Hepburn, Deborah | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Hostage, Katherine | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Jones, Darrell | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Kardys, Richard | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Kelly-Rank, Sally | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Kruger, Robert | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Lyons, Amy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Manzke, Sarah | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Meigs, Stephen | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Moran, Joseph | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Olsen, Janice | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Potter, Charles | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Profenna, Leonardo | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Ransom, Heather | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 | |
| Schnelzer, Gary | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/22/2025 |
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.