Average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around November 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Mexia Ltc Nursing And Rehab during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Incomplete smoking assessments were found for three residents whose records showed current tobacco use and BIMS scores indicating intact cognition. Although each smoking assessment stated the resident was oriented and aware of smoking safety, the sections indicating whether the resident was safe to smoke unsupervised or required direct supervision were left blank. The care plans identified the residents as smokers and described them as safe smokers, and the DON stated the missing supervision determinations were an oversight.
MDS Assessments Did Not Accurately Reflect Smoking Status: Two residents had annual MDSs that marked current tobacco use as no even though their care plans and smoking assessments identified them as smokers and safe smokers. One resident had intact cognition with a smoking assessment confirming awareness of smoking safety, and the other had COPD, oxygen dependence, and a smoking assessment noting she wore oxygen that had to be removed during smoking. The MDSN acknowledged the smoking status should have been included on the MDS and that it was not coded correctly or was missing.
The facility did not maintain a working call system in resident bathrooms and bathing areas across four halls, resulting in residents using cow bells and requiring staff to make frequent rounds to check on their needs. The call system failure persisted for several days, and staff confirmed the outage affected all residents in the impacted areas.
A resident with multiple diagnoses, including muscle weakness and lack of coordination, did not have their care plan updated to include interventions for falls related to unsteadiness during transfers. Despite the need for staff assistance being identified, the care plan was not revised to reflect these interventions, and the MDS Coordinator could not explain the omission.
The facility failed to maintain effective infection control practices, as observed in the care provided by a CNA and an LVN to two residents. The CNA did not perform hand hygiene or change gloves during peri-care and Foley catheter care, while the LVN failed to sanitize hands between glove changes during wound care. Both staff members acknowledged their lapses despite having received training. The facility's policies on hand hygiene and infection control were not followed, increasing the risk of infection spread among residents.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and fall risks had their call light out of reach on two occasions, contrary to the facility's policy. Interviews with the DON and ADM confirmed the importance of call light accessibility for timely assistance, which was not maintained in this instance.
A resident with multiple health issues, including missing and chipped teeth, was not accurately assessed for chewing difficulties in her MDS, leading to an incorrect diet plan. Interviews with staff confirmed the oversight, emphasizing the importance of accurate assessments to ensure proper care.
A facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for a resident, omitting a physician-ordered chopped meat diet necessary due to the resident's dental issues. Interviews with staff confirmed the care plan should have included this dietary requirement to ensure proper nutrition, as per facility policy.
Incomplete Smoking Assessments for Three Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain complete and accurately documented smoking assessments for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for smoking consents and medical record accuracy. For Resident #23, Resident #29, and Resident #44, the smoking assessments documented that each resident was oriented according to BIMS review and aware of safety associated with smoking, but the boxes indicating whether the resident was safe to smoke unsupervised or required direct supervision while smoking were left unchecked. The report also noted that each resident had current tobacco use marked as yes on the MDS. Resident #23 was a [AGE]-year-old female with diagnoses including colon cancer, need for assistance with personal care, anemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, repeated falls, retention of urine, and lack of coordination. Resident #29 was a [AGE]-year-old male with diagnoses including epilepsy, anxiety, muscle wasting, lack of coordination, cognitive communication deficit, and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Resident #44 was a [AGE]-year-old female with diagnoses including heart disease, repeated falls, need for assistance with personal care, hyperlipidemia, polyneuropathy, and lack of coordination. Their annual MDS assessments showed BIMS scores of 15, 15, and 14 respectively. The care plans for the three residents identified them as smokers and stated they were safe smokers or passed safe smoking evaluation, with goals related to being free from injury related to smoking. During interviews, the LVN, DON, and ADM stated that smoking assessments were used to determine whether a resident could smoke unsupervised or needed direct supervision, that nurses were responsible for completing them, and that incomplete assessments could result in staff not knowing whether supervision was needed. The DON stated the missing supervision determinations for Resident #23, Resident #29, and Resident #44 were an oversight on her part.
MDS Assessments Did Not Accurately Reflect Smoking Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that annual MDS assessments accurately reflected the smoking status of 2 residents, Resident #23 and Resident #38. Resident #23 was a [AGE]-year-old female admitted with diagnoses including colon cancer, anemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, repeated falls, urinary retention, and lack of coordination. Her annual MDS, dated [DATE], marked current tobacco use as no, even though her Smoking Assessment dated 09/29/2025 stated she was oriented, aware of smoking safety, and her care plan dated 10/15/2025 identified her as a smoker and a safe smoker. Resident #38 was a [AGE]-year-old female admitted with diagnoses including COPD, lack of coordination, repeated falls, oxygen dependence, muscle weakness, and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting the right dominant side. Her care plan dated 07/29/2025 identified her as a smoker and stated she had passed a safe smoking evaluation and was deemed a safe smoker, and her Smoking Assessment dated 10/19/2025 stated she was oriented, aware of smoking safety, wore oxygen that required removal during smoking, and was safe to smoke unsupervised. However, her annual MDS, dated [DATE], also marked current tobacco use as no. During interviews, the MDSN stated the resident's smoking status was supposed to be on the MDS and acknowledged that Resident #23's and Resident #38's smoking status was not coded correctly or was not on the MDS.
Failure to Maintain Functional Resident Call System in All Halls
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a functioning resident call system in all resident bathrooms and bathing areas across four halls when the call light system became inoperable. Observations confirmed that the call lights were not working, and residents were instead provided with cow bells to signal for assistance. Staff were required to make rounds every 15 to 30 minutes to check on residents, particularly those unable to use the call bells. The breakdown of the call system was first noted on 11/11/25, and as of 11/15/25, the system remained nonfunctional. Interviews with the DON, Maintenance Director, and RN confirmed that the call system outage affected all residents on the impacted halls. The Maintenance Director reported that the system had previously been checked weekly and was functioning until the complete failure. A technician was called, but there was no clear timeline for repair. The facility's policy requires a functional call system at all times, but this standard was not met during the period in question.
Failure to Update Care Plan for Fall Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to review and revise the person-centered care plan to reflect the current condition of a resident who was at risk for falls. Specifically, the care plan for a male resident with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes, essential hypertension, muscle weakness, and lack of coordination was not updated to include interventions for falls related to unsteadiness during transfers, despite these needs being identified. The care plan had last been revised for falls interventions over two years prior, and no updates were made to address the resident's current condition and need for staff assistance during transfers. Interviews with the DON and MDS Coordinator confirmed that it was the responsibility of the MDS Coordinator to update care plans with appropriate interventions so staff would know how to assist residents. However, the MDS Coordinator could not provide a reason for the lack of updates to the resident's care plan. The facility's policy required comprehensive, person-centered care plans with measurable objectives and targeted interventions, but this was not followed in the case of this resident.
Infection Control Lapses in Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by the actions of CNA A and LVN A during care for two residents. CNA A did not perform hand hygiene or change gloves when providing peri-care and Foley catheter care for a male resident with a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus, pneumonia, urinary retention, and benign prostatic hypertrophy. The CNA applied barrier cream and conducted catheter care without proper hand hygiene, and was observed taking gloves from her pants pocket, which is against infection control protocols. Similarly, LVN A did not perform hand hygiene when changing gloves during wound care for a female resident with a history of congestive heart failure, non-pressure chronic ulcer, peripheral vascular disease, and diabetes mellitus type 2. Although LVN A used clean gloves and an aseptic non-touch technique, she failed to sanitize her hands before donning new gloves, increasing the risk of cross-contamination. Both staff members acknowledged their lapses in infection control practices during interviews, despite having received training on these protocols. The facility's policies on hand hygiene and infection control were not adhered to, as evidenced by the observations and interviews. The Director of Nursing and the Administrator both emphasized the importance of following infection control measures to prevent the spread of infections, but the observed practices of CNA A and LVN A did not align with these expectations. The facility's failure to ensure compliance with infection control protocols has the potential to affect all residents by increasing the risk of spreading infections.
Failure to Ensure Call Light Accessibility for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's call light was within reach, which is a necessary accommodation for the resident's needs and preferences. This deficiency was observed during two separate instances where the resident was lying in bed, and the call light was found on the floor, out of reach. The resident in question was an elderly female with severe cognitive impairment, requiring substantial assistance with daily activities and was care planned for fall risks due to gait and balance issues. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator (ADM) confirmed that it is the responsibility of all staff to ensure call lights are within reach to provide timely assistance. The facility's policy mandates that residents have a means to call staff for help, which was not adhered to in this case. The failure to keep the call light within reach could prevent the resident from receiving necessary assistance, as acknowledged by the DON and ADM.
Inaccurate Resident Assessment on Chewing Difficulty
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's assessment accurately reflected her status, specifically regarding her difficulty with chewing. The resident, an elderly female with multiple diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypokalemia, lack of coordination, muscle weakness, and cognitive communication deficit, was admitted to the facility with a need for a chopped meat diet due to missing and chipped teeth. However, her Quarterly MDS assessment did not indicate any difficulty with chewing, and her care plan inaccurately listed her diet as regular, without noting the need for chopped meat. Interviews with the resident, the MDS Coordinator, the Director of Nursing (DON), and the Administrator (ADM) confirmed the oversight. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged the importance of reflecting chewing difficulties in the MDS to ensure appropriate care and prevent issues such as weight loss. The DON and ADM also emphasized that the resident's MDS should have included her chewing difficulties to ensure she received the proper diet and care. The facility's policy requires that any person completing a portion of the MDS must certify its accuracy, highlighting a lapse in adherence to this policy.
Failure to Implement Comprehensive Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for a resident, which did not include the necessary dietary modifications. The resident, who was cognitively intact, had a physician's order for a regular diet with chopped meat due to missing and chipped teeth, which made chewing difficult. However, the care plan did not reflect this dietary requirement, potentially leading to the resident receiving the wrong food texture. Interviews with the MDS Coordinator, DON, and ADM confirmed that the care plan should have included the chopped meat diet to ensure the resident received appropriate nutrition. The facility's policy requires care plans to include measurable objectives and timetables to meet residents' needs, but this was not adhered to in this case, as evidenced by the care plan's omission of the chopped meat requirement.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 23 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Mexia
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Manor Healthcare Residence | 0.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Skilled Care Of Mexia | 0.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 1 |
| Teague Nursing And Rehabilitation | 11.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
| Groesbeck Ltc Nursing And Rehabilitation | 11.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Windsor Healthcare Residence | 11.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 1 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Mexia Ltc Nursing And Rehab.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.