Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
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 The Heights Of Tomball during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with multiple comorbidities and limited mobility developed an unstageable pressure ulcer during their stay, despite care plans that included regular repositioning, use of barrier cream, and a pressure-reducing mattress. Nursing staff and the DON acknowledged that inadequate repositioning and timely care could contribute to wound development. The deficiency was identified as Immediate Jeopardy due to failure to provide care consistent with professional standards to prevent and manage pressure ulcers.
A resident with a history of falls and osteoporosis suffered a fracture due to improper transfer by a CNA who did not use the required mechanical lift and two-person assist. The resident's care plan specified these requirements, but the CNA was unaware, leading to the resident's injury and subsequent surgery.
The facility failed to transmit the MDS assessments for two residents, including the End of PPS Part A stay and Discharge Return Not Anticipated assessments. Despite being included in daily discharge planning meetings, the RN nurse assessment coordinators did not complete the required assessments, as confirmed by record reviews and interviews.
A facility failed to ensure a resident's bedside call light was functioning. The resident, diagnosed with hemiplegia, anxiety disorder, dementia, and cerebral infarction, required assistance for daily activities. Observations revealed the call light was not working, and the resident could not report how long it had been malfunctioning. The Director of Clinical Education and Maintenance Director acknowledged the issue, and the Administrator admitted the lack of a specific policy on call light function.
Failure to Prevent and Manage Pressure Ulcer in High-Risk Resident
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a male resident with multiple comorbidities, including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, heart disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and osteoporosis, developed an unstageable pressure ulcer during his stay at the facility. Upon admission, a head-to-toe assessment was completed, and the only noted skin issue was a surgical dressing on the right hip and bruising on both hands. The resident was care planned for skin care issues, including being kept dry, use of barrier cream, and regular repositioning, as he was unable to reposition himself and required two-person assistance. Despite these interventions being documented, a pressure ulcer was identified on the coccyx area after a CNA noticed an open area following a shower, and subsequent assessment confirmed the presence of an unstageable wound with eschar and slough. Interviews with nursing staff and the DON revealed that the resident was at risk for pressure ulcers due to his inability to reposition himself and incontinence. Staff acknowledged that lack of repositioning and not changing a resident in a timely manner could contribute to wound development. The wound care doctor and nursing staff stated that the resident was provided with a pressure-reducing mattress, barrier cream, and was to be repositioned every two hours or more as needed. However, the development of the pressure ulcer indicated a failure to ensure that these interventions were effectively implemented or monitored, as the wound was not present upon admission and developed during the resident's stay. The facility's policy required protocols for prevention, identification, assessment, and management of skin conditions and pressure ulcers, but the occurrence of the pressure ulcer in this resident demonstrated a lapse in adherence to these standards. The deficiency was identified as Immediate Jeopardy due to the failure to provide care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ulcers and ensure necessary treatment and services for residents at risk.
Failure to Provide Safe Transfers Results in Resident Injury
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and the use of assistive devices to prevent accidents for a resident, leading to a serious injury. On the specified date, a CNA did not provide a safe transfer for the resident using a mechanical lift and two-person assist as required. Instead, the CNA performed an unassisted transfer, which was not in accordance with the resident's care plan. This improper handling resulted in the resident suffering an acute, mildly displaced spiral fracture of the right mid/distal femoral shaft, necessitating surgical intervention. The resident involved was an elderly female with a complex medical history, including osteoporosis, which may have contributed to the severity of the injury. She was dependent on staff for most activities of daily living and had a history of falls. Despite her cognitive impairments, she was able to communicate basic needs with assistance. On the day of the incident, the resident was transferred by the CNA without the use of a mechanical lift, contrary to her care plan, which specified the need for a mechanical lift and two-person assistance due to her inability to bear weight. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of awareness regarding the resident's transfer requirements, as the CNA was not informed of the need for a mechanical lift until after the incident. The facility's documentation and staff interviews indicated that the resident's care plan was not consistently followed, and there was a misunderstanding among staff about the appropriate transfer methods. This oversight placed the resident at risk of serious injury, which ultimately occurred when the CNA attempted to transfer her without the necessary equipment and assistance.
Failure to Transmit MDS Assessments for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to transmit the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for two residents, specifically the End of PPS Part A stay and Discharge Return Not Anticipated assessments. Resident #57, a [AGE] year-old female with diagnoses including encephalopathy, fracture of the right wrist and hand, and urinary tract infection, was admitted for skilled nursing following hospitalization and discharged on 12/13/2023. Resident #112, a [AGE] year-old female with acute kidney failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was also admitted for skilled nursing following hospitalization and discharged on 11/10/2023. The facility did not transmit the required MDS assessments for these residents within the mandated timeframe, which could place the residents at risk of not having their assessments transmitted timely. This was confirmed through record reviews and interviews with the RN nurse assessment coordinators and the RN Regional Clinical Nurse, who acknowledged the oversight and indicated that discharge assessments should have been completed for all residents leaving the facility. During the investigation, it was revealed that the facility's policy, as outlined in the CMS RAI Version 3.0 Manual, requires discharge assessments for all residents. The RN nurse assessment coordinators reported that they are included in daily facility meetings that cover discharge planning, yet the discharge assessments for Resident #57 and Resident #112 were not completed. The RN Regional Clinical Nurse stated that staff had been in-serviced regarding RAI guidelines, but the deficiency still occurred. The facility census on 03/26/2024 was 116 residents, indicating a significant oversight in the assessment process for the two residents in question.
Failure to Ensure Functioning Call Light for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that Resident #6's bedside call light was functioning. Resident #6, a [AGE] year-old female diagnosed with hemiplegia, anxiety disorder, dementia, and cerebral infarction, required supervision and assistance for various activities of daily living, including toileting, showering, dressing, and personal hygiene. Observations on 03/26/2024 revealed that the resident's call light was not working when pressed, despite a sign in her room instructing her to use the call light for assistance. The resident was unable to report how long the call light had been malfunctioning. The Director of Clinical Education acknowledged the issue and stated she was unaware of the malfunction until it was brought to her attention by the surveyor. The Maintenance Director confirmed that he replaced the broken call light immediately upon being informed of the issue and noted that monthly audits were performed on call lights due to wear and tear. The Administrator admitted that the facility did not have a specific policy on call light function but emphasized the importance of functioning call lights to prevent delays in care. RN A mentioned that Resident #6's cognitive impairment fluctuated, and while the resident could sometimes use the call light, her room's proximity to the nurse's station allowed staff to hear her when she called out for help. However, this did not mitigate the need for a functioning call light as per the resident's care plan, which highlighted the importance of having the call light within reach to prevent falls and ensure timely assistance.
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 473 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 42 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 Tomball
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Park Manor Of Tomball | 0.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 13 | 0 |
| Lawrence Street Health Care Center | 0.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 9 | 1 |
| Tomball Rehab & Nursing | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 10 | 0 |
| Willow Creek Lodge | 3.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| The Broadmoor At Creekside Park | 8.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 11 | 1 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for The Heights Of Tomball.
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.