Average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around September 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 North Park Health And Rehabilitation Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment in the 500 and 600 Halls, with multiple rooms and bathrooms in disrepair. Staff interviews revealed inconsistent reporting of cosmetic issues, and maintenance logs showed incomplete repairs. The disrepair impacted residents' feelings of safety and cleanliness, contrary to the facility's policy on maintaining a homelike environment.
The facility failed to ensure accurate MDS assessments for a resident, incorrectly documenting the use of a urinary catheter despite it being discontinued years prior. Observations and staff interviews confirmed the error, highlighting discrepancies in the resident's care documentation.
A facility failed to complete an accurate PASARR evaluation for a resident with a history of traumatic brain injury, depression, bipolar disorder, and PTSD. The resident's PASRR Level 1 Screening form incorrectly indicated no mental illness, and the error was not identified or corrected by the MDS Nurse, putting the resident at risk of not receiving necessary services.
The facility failed to ensure residents were free of accident hazards and received adequate supervision to prevent elopement. A resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of wandering successfully eloped due to an unsecured front door and lack of routine checks for door security and wander guard functionality. Staff were not adequately trained or informed about the security measures in place, leading to the resident being found outside unsupervised.
Facility Fails to Maintain Safe and Comfortable Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public in the 500 and 600 Halls. Observations revealed multiple scratches and scrapes in the paint on the walls in rooms 505, 507, 605, 607, 608, and 610. Additionally, the bathroom shared by rooms 505 and 507 had chipped paint along the door trims and a large area beneath the sink with a thick white substance indicating incomplete repairs. The bathroom shared between rooms 605 and 607 had a rotted door jamb, separated and bubbling linoleum, and a large black/gray stain on the floor. The bathroom shared by rooms 608 and 610 had gaps and holes in the wall beneath the sink, uneven plaster, and damaged door jambs and doors, indicating poor maintenance and repair work. These conditions were observed during a survey conducted on 4/24/24 and 4/25/24. Interviews with staff, including LVNs, the Administrator, the DON, and the Maintenance Director, revealed that the facility used an app to report maintenance issues. However, the staff did not consistently report cosmetic issues, and there was a lack of awareness about the specific problems in the residents' bathrooms. The Maintenance Director, who had only been at the facility for a few weeks, acknowledged the issues but stated that they had to prioritize high-priority items and that recent major work had been done on the facility. The Administrator and DON both expressed concerns about the impact of the disrepair on residents' feelings of safety and cleanliness. Record reviews of the facility's maintenance logs showed entries related to bathroom flooring and paint touch-ups, but these issues had not been adequately addressed. The facility's policy on resident rights emphasized the importance of providing a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. The failure to maintain the physical environment in good repair placed residents at risk for diminished quality of life and did not align with the facility's policy on maintaining a sanitary and comfortable interior.
Inaccurate MDS Assessment for Resident's Urinary Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that assessments accurately reflected a resident's status, specifically for a resident who was reviewed for the accuracy of assessments. The resident, a male with diagnoses including parkinsonism, diabetes mellitus, and dysphagia, was documented in the MDS Assessment as utilizing an indwelling urinary catheter. However, the resident's physician's orders indicated that the urinary catheter had been discontinued over three years prior. Additionally, the resident's care plan noted bladder incontinence and the use of adult briefs, with no mention of a urinary catheter. Observations and interviews with staff confirmed that the resident did not utilize a urinary catheter, revealing a documentation error in the MDS Assessment completed on 03/08/24. The MDS Nurse acknowledged the error and stated that it had not been corrected in the subsequent assessment. The deficiency was identified through a combination of record reviews, observations, and staff interviews. The resident was observed to be clean, well-groomed, and free from any odors or signs of distress, and was not using a catheter. Interviews with the LVN and the MDS Nurse confirmed that the resident had never utilized a urinary catheter during their tenure at the facility. The facility's policy on MDS Assessment Data Accuracy requires that assessments accurately reflect the resident's status, which was not adhered to in this case, leading to potential funding discrepancies and inaccurate quality measures.
Failure to Complete Accurate PASARR Evaluation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete an accurate PASARR evaluation for a resident prior to and after admission. Specifically, Resident #19, a male with a history of traumatic brain injury, depression, bipolar disorder, and PTSD, was admitted with a PASRR Level 1 Screening form that incorrectly indicated no indicators for mental illness. This error was not identified or corrected by the facility's MDS Nurse, who received the form from the transferring facility and failed to verify its accuracy. As a result, the resident was at risk of not receiving necessary specialized therapy and equipment services. Observations and interviews revealed that Resident #19 exhibited behaviors consistent with his diagnoses, such as refusing care and becoming agitated when pressed. Despite these indicators, the PASRR Level 1 Screening form remained inaccurate until the MDS Nurse submitted a correction form to the State. The facility's policy and procedure for PASRR Level 1 Screenings were not followed, leading to the deficiency. The Administrator acknowledged the risk posed by failing to complete accurate PASARR screenings, which could result in residents not receiving appropriate services.
Failure to Prevent Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure residents were free of accident hazards and received adequate supervision to prevent elopement for one resident. Specifically, the front door was not secure after hours when there was no front entry receptionist, leading to the successful elopement of a resident to the front patio. This failure placed residents at risk of elopements, as evidenced by the resident's ability to leave the facility unsupervised and be found outside by staff in the parking area. The resident involved had a history of cognitive impairment and wandering, with a BIMS score indicating severe cognitive impairment. Despite being identified as an elopement risk, the resident did not have a wander guard while on the secure unit. Staff interviews revealed a lack of routine checks for door security and wander guard functionality, and there was no clear identification of which residents had wander guards. The resident's care plan and elopement assessments indicated a high risk for wandering, yet the necessary precautions were not consistently implemented. Observations and interviews during the investigation highlighted several lapses in the facility's elopement prevention measures. The front door alarm did not activate when the resident exited, and staff were not adequately trained or informed about the security measures in place. The facility's policy on elopement prevention was not effectively followed, as evidenced by the failure to verify the function of wander guards and alarm systems regularly. This oversight contributed to the resident's ability to elope and the potential risk to other residents in the facility.
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 436 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 19 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 Mckinney
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Park Manor Of Mckinney | 0.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Belterra Health & Rehab | 3.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 10 | 0 |
| Mckinney Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center | 3.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Princeton Medical Lodge | 5.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 0 |
| The Belmont At Twin Creeks | 8.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for North Park Health And Rehabilitation Center.
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.