507 Martin Luther King Blvd, Lubbock, TX 79403 · Lubbock County · (806) 744-1113
120 certified beds, about 105 residents a day · Government - Hospital district · Medicare and Medicaid since 2012
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676318 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 9, 2026, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
None of its 28 health citations since January 2024 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 3.11 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.43 of those hours.
61.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Priority Management, an affiliated group of 38 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 28 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to treat residents with respect, dignity, and care in a manner and in an environment that promotes the maintenance or enhancement of their quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality for 11 of 11 confidential residents in that: The facility failed to ensure staff were not utilizing their personal cell phones while providing care, which included assisting residents with their showers and performing peri-care. The deficient practice could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life, loss of dignity and self-worth.
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 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary services, in that: The facility failed to ensure the fryer was free of build up and grime. The facility failed to ensure the toaster was free of build-up and grime. The facility failed to ensure the wall behind the dishwashing station was free of build-up and grime. The facility failed to ensure hot holding pans/cookie sheets were free of build-up and grime. The facility failed to ensure all canned food items had expiration or use-by dates. The facility failed to ensure all pantry food items had expiration or use-by dates. The facility failed to ensure prepared gravy had an expiration or use-by date. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that its medication error rate was less than 5 percent. The facility had a medication error rate of 15.38 percent based on 4 errors out of 26 opportunities, which involved 2 (Resident #107 and Resident #45) of 3 residents reviewed for medication administration.-MA A failed to give Resident #107's dose of the medication Metoprolol Tartrate at the ordered time, resulting in a late dose. -MA A failed to give Resident #45's dose of the medication Levetiracetam at the ordered time, resulting in a late dose. -MA A failed to give Resident #45's medication Lisinopril according to physician's orders when she administered the medication outside the ordered vital sign parameters. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow their own established smoking policy for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for smoking. (Resident #1)The facility failed to ensure staff followed the smoking policy and took residents out to smoke in designated smoking area. This failure could place residents at risk of injury or harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to incorporate recommendations from a PASRR level II determination and the PASRR evaluation report for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for PASRR. The facility failed to submit a complete and accurate request for NFSS in the LTC online portal within 20 days after the IDT meeting. This failure could cause residents with mental health disorders and psychiatric conditions to have a delay in services or not receive specialized services or equipment that may be needed for a better quality of life. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 08/28/25 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences, except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the resident or other residents, for 14 of 24 residents (Resident #12, Resident #31 and 12 confidential Residents), reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure staff performed rounds every two hours on the night shift. 12 of 12 residents who attended Resident Council stated CNAs do not perform rounds every 2 hours at night. Residents stated they have not had access to water due to the lack of rounding. Residents stated they have not had assistance with adjusting the temperature of their rooms and have not had assistance with turning due to the lack of rounding. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a private meeting space for residents' monthly council meetings for 12 of 24 confidential residents who were reviewed for resident council. The facility failed to provide a private space for resident council meetings. This failure could place residents at risk of not being able to voice concerns due to a lack of privacy.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident had a right to personal privacy and confidentiality of his or her personal and medical records which included accommodations, medical treatment, written and telephone communications, personal care, visits, and meetings of family and resident groups for 12 of 12 confidential residents. The facility failed to ensure staff were not on their personal cell phones while providing care, which included peri-care to residents. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their personal privacy maintained during medical treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide information to resident's and their representatives on their rights related to filing grievances or concerns for 12 of 24 confidential residents. The facility failed to ensure 12 of 24 confidential residents were provided, through postings in prominent locations; the Grievance Procedure, were provided access to the Grievance form, were provided information regarding who the facility grievance officer was, their contact information, and how to file an anonymous grievance. This failure could place the residents at risk of unresolved grievances and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored properly for 3 of 4 medication carts (medication cart for hall 200, medication cart for hall 100, and nurse's medication cart for hall 200), reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed on 05/19/25 to maintain proper medication storage after the following was found: 1. The medication cart for 200 hall contained 10.5 loose pills. 2. The medication cart for 100 hall contained 3 loose pills. 3. The nurse's medication cart for hall 200 contained 10 loose pills. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving prescribed medications as ordered and place the facility at risk of drug diversions.
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 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary services, in that: The facility failed on 05/18/2025 to seal and date food stored in refrigerator. The facility failed on 05/18/2025 to ensure kitchen equipment was clean. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness.
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 3 of 24 residents (Resident #73, #97 and #304) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed on 05/18/25 to implement and maintain Enhanced Barrier Precautions physicians ordered on 04/16/25 when LVN B failed to wear proper PPE when providing wound care for Resident #97. 2. The facility failed on 05/19/25 to ensure proper medication administration infection control procedures were used when MA A failed to sanitize her hands before or after medication administration for Resident #73 and #304. These failures could place residents at risk for the spread of infection and cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity, and care for each resident in a manner and environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident individuality and protected and promoted the rights of the resident personal privacy for each resident's individuality for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #254) reviewed for dignity in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #254's Condom catheter bag had a privacy cover on it to provide respect and dignity. This failure placed residents in the facility, with Condom catheters, at risk of feeling uncomfortable or embarrassed and decreased privacy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that its medication error rate was not 5 percent or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 8.0% based on 2 errors out of 25 opportunities, which involved 2 of 3 residents (Resident #8 and Resident #304) reviewed for medication administration. 1. MA A failed to properly verify and dispense Eliquis (blood thinner) according to physician's order with a start date of 12/04/24 for Resident #304, when on 05/19/25 MA A dispensed and was going to administer Resident #304 with one 2.5 MG tablet instead of two 2.5 MG tablets until surveyor intervention. 2. MA A failed to administer Vitamin A (supplement) according to physician's order dated 05/13/25 to Resident #8, when on 05/19/25 MA A was unable to administer the Vitamin A supplement to Resident #8, resulting in a missed dose. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to assist residents in obtaining routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #8) reviewed for dental services. The facility did not assist Resident #8, who had missing teeth, with a dental service consult. This failure could place residents at risk of oral complications, dental pain, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of property and exploitation for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for misappropriation of property. The facility failed to prevent the misappropriation of Resident #1's Morphine Medication. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving prescribed medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe, comfortable, and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of diseases for 3 of 3 residents (Residents #1, #2 and #3) reviewed for infection control. 1. CNA A failed to utilize hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident #1. 2. CNA B failed to utilize hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident #2. 3. CNA C failed to utilize hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident #3. These failures could place residents at risk for infection and cross contamination.
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 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary services. 1) The facility failed to protect foods from potential contamination. 2) The facility failed to ensure foods were not expired. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to make residents and residents' family members aware of the grievances process and allow them to exercise their right to file a grievance leading to the facility not addressing the grievances of residents. According to the facilities' grievance policy the facility failed to make prompt effortsto resolve grievances for 5 of 26residents. The facility failed to provide residents and family members follow up communication and resolutions to filed grievances. The facility failed to file and resolve a grievance for Resident #80 regarding missing laundry. The facility failure could place the residents at risk of unresolved grievances and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure preadmission screening for individuals identified with MI, DD, or ID were evaluated for services assessments 6 of 24 residents (Residents #2, #41, #71, #78, #83 and #292) reviewed for PASRR screening, in that: Residents #2, #41, #71, #78, #83 and #292 did not have an accurate PASRR Level 1 assessments when they had a diagnosis of mental illness. These failures could place residents with an inaccurate PASRR Level 1 and no PASRR Level 2 Evaluation at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide or obtain laboratory services only when ordered by a physician for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #62) reviewed for labs in that: The facility failed to obtain Keppra level labs for Resident #62 as ordered by the physician. This failure could put residents who may have lab work ordered at risk of not having their medical needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable, and at a safe, and appetizing temperature for 3 of 3 food forms (Regular, Mechanical Soft, and Pureed) for 1 of 1 meal reviewed for palatability. 1) The facility failed to provide food that was palatable for 3 of 3 food forms served (Regular, Mechanical Soft, and Pureed) at 1 of 1 meal observed (04/10/24 lunch). These failures could place residents at risk of decreased food intake, hunger, and unwanted weight loss.
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 to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 3 of 6 Residents observed for infection control for practices (Resident #3, #17, and #19) in that: 1. CNA A failed to wash hands prior to gathering perineal care supplies for Resident #3, CNA A failed to use proper hand washing during perineal care for Resident #3 while going from dirty to clean. CNA A failed to use correct hand washing practices after providing perineal care for Resident #3. 2. RN failed to use proper hand washing practices after providing wound care for Resident #17. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident has a right to personal privacy and confidentiality of his or her personal medical records for 1 of 1 resident reviewed on medication pass (Resident #88). a) The MA left two top halves of Resident #88's medication cards, with identifiable information, laying on the top of her medication cart unattended. This failure could place residents at risk of having medical information exposed to others and possible misuse of personal information. Findings Included: Record review of Resident #88's face sheet date retrieved on 04/11/2024, indicated Resident #88 was an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: anxiety and pain. Record review of Resident #88's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan to meet the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 24 residents (Residents #18, #38, and #78) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop a care plan for Residents #18's current advanced directives. The facility failed to implement a care plan for Resident #38 for nutrition. The facility failed to implement a care plan for Resident #78 for falls. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the care required to meet their individualized needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored properly in the cart for 1 of 4 medication carts (hall 200) in that: 1. MA was in the middle of medication pass when she realized she was missing a medication, she placed the already dispensed medications in an open medication cup and then placed them in her unlocked medication cart and then proceeded to the supply room to find the other medication. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving prescribed medications as ordered and drug diversions.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free of any significant medication errors for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medication administration. The facility failed to ensure MA B administered Lorazepam 1mg tablet orally (to treat anxiety) to Resident #1 on 03/25/2024 according to physician orders. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving incorrect amounts of medication prescribed by their physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to meet the highest practicable physical, mental, psychosocial well-being for 1 of 5 residents (Residents #2) reviewed for care plans as follows: Facility failed to develop care plans for Resident #2's regarding hospice care, mechanical lift, weight loss, oxygen therapy and ADL's. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the care required to meet their individualized needs.
1 fire safety citation on file: 1 on May 20, 2025.
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) | 3.11 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.43 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.78 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.98 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.69 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 61.6% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 53.8% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.12 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 3.24 on weekdays and 2.78 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 2.7% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.13 in April to June 2025 to 3.11 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 | 3.11 | 0.43 | 3.24 | 2.78 | 2.7% | 0 of 90 | 105 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.12 | 0.34 | 3.22 | 2.86 | 1.9% | 0 of 92 | 103 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.12 | 0.39 | 3.25 | 2.80 | 0.9% | 0 of 92 | 105 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.13 | 0.38 | 3.26 | 2.81 | 1.5% | 0 of 91 | 103 |
| 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 | 11.1 | 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 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.1 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.2 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.9 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 4.7 | 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 | 1.4 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Windmill Village Rehabilitation & Care Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (43.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
43.7% 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. 42 eligible stays.
9.6% 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. 60 eligible stays.
8.5% 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.
67.6% 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. 37 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. 51 residents counted.
8.8% 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. 51 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. 5 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: FANNIN COUNTY HOSPITAL AUTHORITY. CMS links this home to Priority Management, a group of 38 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fannin County Hospital Authority | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 09/01/2025 |
| Sanderson, Clark | Corporate director | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Pmg Opco - Lubbock LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Bauder, William | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Bauder, Kelly | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Bauder, Madison | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Bauder, Parker | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Boulware, Douglas | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Boulware, Sandra | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Boulware, Steven | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Boulware, Thomas | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Walker, Katie | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Bauder Family Investments, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Boulware St. James LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Pmg Realco-Mabank, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Steven Boulware Family Investments LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2025 | |
| Skinner, Derek | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/01/2025 | |
| Whitesides, Jessica | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/01/2025 |
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.