Average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around January 2027
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 Whitehall Rehab & Nursing during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with dementia who was dependent on staff for all ADLs did not receive scheduled hygiene care, including showers, shave, oral care, and nail care, as required by his care plan. Records showed missed showers and no skin observation worksheet completion for several days, and observations found facial hair, buildup on the lips, and black substance under the nails. Staff stated CNAs were responsible for completing the care and documenting it, with nurse oversight.
Worn mechanical lift slings were found in use for four residents, including residents with dependence for transfers and mobility, severe cognitive impairment, and a recent femur fracture. Surveyors observed faded straps and illegible sling labels in resident rooms and wheelchairs, while care plans and order summaries did not consistently reflect mechanical lift use. Facility policy and manufacturer guidance reviewed by surveyors stated that slings with fading, wear, or illegible labels should be removed from use.
A facility failed to follow infection control practices during incontinent care, EBP care, and soiled linen handling. CNAs did not perform hand hygiene before care, failed to change soiled gloves when moving from dirty to clean tasks, did not use gowns for a resident requiring EBP, handled wipes and linens improperly, and carried unbagged soiled linen through the hallway before washing hands.
A resident with dementia and severely impaired decision-making was repeatedly observed in bed with her call light left out of reach, despite a care plan directing staff to keep it within reach for assistance. Staff interviews confirmed the resident should have access to the call light, and the facility policy required the call light/bell to be within reach regardless of location.
Care plans were not reviewed and revised after assessments for two residents. One resident with stroke-related diagnoses and dependence for mobility had a care plan that still listed partial/moderate assist transfers instead of a mechanical lift, while another resident with dementia and a feeding tube had a care plan that did not include the EBP requirement related to the tube. Staff interviews confirmed the care plans did not match current care needs and that the interdisciplinary review process had missed these updates.
A resident with stroke, dementia, PVD, and AFib was receiving Seroquel and trazodone, but the facility did not act on repeated pharmacy consultant recommendations that Seroquel needed a CMS-approved diagnosis to continue. The MDS showed severe cognitive impairment, no behaviors in the look-back period, and antipsychotic use, while the DON said the recommendation was missed and the MD did not recall receiving it.
Inaccurate meal intake documentation was found for a resident with dementia, stroke history, PVD, and AFib who was on a mechanical soft diet and required substantial to maximal help with eating. An LVN charted that the resident ate breakfast and lunch, but the meal intake sheet had no entries, the resident was observed asleep with an untouched lunch tray, and a CNA said he had not eaten breakfast or lunch. The LVN later acknowledged the charting was incorrect and false documentation, and the ADON and DON stated meal intake should be documented daily and corrected if entered in error.
A resident with dementia and a history of elopement risk managed to leave the facility and was found in a hazardous area outside. Despite having a wander alarm, the resident eloped at night, and staff initially failed to locate her promptly. The resident was eventually found unharmed, but the incident highlighted a lapse in supervision and response to alarms.
The facility's kitchen was found to have unsanitary conditions, including molded food and improperly stored items. Staff interviews revealed inconsistent responsibility for checking and discarding expired food, with the dietary manager and administrator acknowledging lapses in adherence to food storage protocols.
A facility failed to ensure privacy and dignity for three residents during care and meal assistance. A resident receiving incontinent care was exposed due to CNAs not pulling the privacy curtain, while two residents were fed by standing staff, potentially making them feel rushed. Staff acknowledged the lapses despite having completed resident rights training.
The facility failed to ensure no more than 14 hours between supper and breakfast, with breakfast often served after 9:00 AM and supper around 6:00 PM. Residents reported having to request snacks, and diabetic residents did not receive snacks at night. The Dietary Manager acknowledged past complaints about snack preparation, and the facility lacked a policy on meal and snack frequency, contributing to the deficiency.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and pressure ulcers did not receive consistent wound care as prescribed. The facility failed to document wound care for the resident's left heel on 3 days and right buttock on 4 days in October. Staff interviews revealed that wound care was not always performed when the treatment nurse was off duty, despite it being the responsibility of the RN on the floor.
A facility failed to adhere to respiratory care protocols for a resident with COPD, as the nebulizer mask, humidifier bottle, and oxygen tubing were not changed weekly per physician's orders. Observations showed outdated equipment, and interviews confirmed that night shift nurses were responsible for these changes, which were not completed as required.
A resident with dementia eloped from the facility and was found in a nearby emergency room parking lot. Despite having a wander alarm, the incident was not reported to HHSC within 24 hours as required. The administrator believed staff maintained visual contact, leading to the decision not to report the incident as an elopement.
A resident with cognitive impairment and dependency for ADLs was injured during transport in a facility van due to inadequate securement. The van lacked a shoulder harness, and the staff was not trained on its necessity, leading to the resident falling forward and striking his head. This oversight in safety measures placed all residents using the van at risk.
The facility failed to ensure that four nurse aides completed a competency evaluation program within four months of hire, as required. Despite receiving skills checkoff training, these aides were scheduled to work without certification. Interviews revealed a lack of awareness and tracking system for the four-month requirement among staff, including the ADON, DON, and Administrator. The facility had been using in-house training since COVID-19 and recently transitioned to an online program, but the deficiency persisted due to inadequate oversight.
Missed ADL Hygiene Care and Incomplete Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide ADL care to a resident with dementia who was dependent on staff for all ADLs and had a care plan calling for shower, shave, oral care, hair care, and nail care per schedule and when needed. The resident’s shower schedule called for showers on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday on the night shift, but the medical record showed he had not received a bath or shower since 02/14/2026, with entries on 02/18/2026 and 02/24/2026 marked not applicable, indicating he missed 4 showers. The resident’s skin observation worksheet also had not been completed since 02/13/2026. During observations on 02/23/2026, 02/24/2026, and 02/25/2026, the resident was noted to have facial hair, white buildup on his lips, and a thick black substance under the nails on both hands. On 02/24/2026, he was lying in bed with his eyes closed and could not answer when asked about his last bath, saying, "do what you got to do." Staff interviews showed CNAs used the shower schedule to determine care, were expected to complete skin, nail, shave, and mouth care with showers, and were to notify the nurse if a resident refused. The CNA, LVN, DON, and Administrator all stated that dependent residents should receive personal hygiene care as scheduled, and the facility policy stated residents unable to carry out ADLs would receive necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene.
Worn Mechanical Lift Slings Left in Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the residents’ environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible by leaving worn and damaged mechanical lift slings in use for four residents. Surveyors observed lift slings with faded straps and faded or illegible labels in the rooms or wheelchairs of Residents #35, #17, #65, and #66. The report states that the slings had signs of wear, including faded coloring and illegible printing on the labels, and that these conditions were observed during multiple observations. Resident #35 was a female with a history of cerebral infarction, hypertension, and peripheral vascular disease. Her MDS indicated she was dependent for all ADLs, used a motorized wheelchair, and did not walk. Her care plan listed partial and moderate assistance for transfers, but it did not reflect the current need for a mechanical lift, and the order summary did not include an order for transfer status or mechanical lift use. During observation, she was in bed and stated that staff used the mechanical lift every day to transfer her to her wheelchair, while the sling in her room had faded straps. Resident #17 had Alzheimer’s disease, COPD, and hypertension, with severe cognitive impairment and dependence for ADLs, transfers, and mobility. Her care plan indicated dependent transfers, but the order summary did not include an order for mechanical lift use. Resident #65 had a displaced intertrochanteric fracture of the left femur, was cognitively intact, and required assistance of one for transfers; his care plan indicated maximum assist of one person, but the order summary did not include a transfer order. Resident #66 was also identified in the deficiency as having a worn sling, and the Administrator stated the slings used for Residents #17, #35, #65, and #66 were removed from service. The facility policy and manufacturer guidance reviewed by surveyors stated that slings with fading, wear, or illegible labels should be removed from use.
Infection Control Failures During Resident Care and Linen Handling
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program during incontinent care and other direct resident care activities. One resident was admitted with critical illness myopathy, a sacral pressure ulcer, depression, and total dependence for toileting hygiene, with the resident always incontinent of urine and bowel. During observed incontinent care, a CNA donned a gown and gloves but did not perform hand hygiene before putting on gloves, touched dirty items and then handled clean items without changing gloves, and continued care without changing gloves after handling a soiled brief. The CNA later acknowledged she had not washed or sanitized her hands before care and should have changed gloves before placing a clean brief on the resident. A second resident had dementia, severely impaired cognition, was dependent for all ADLs, had a feeding tube, and was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. The resident had an EBP sign posted outside the room indicating gown and gloves were required for care. During observed incontinent care, two CNAs entered the room without applying gowns, adjusted linens and the resident’s gown, and one CNA cleaned the resident, removed a soiled brief, and applied a new brief and skin barrier without changing soiled gloves. One CNA removed a glove and used the bed remote, both removed gloves and placed them in a bag, and one CNA sanitized her hands while the other left the room without hand hygiene. The same CNA then placed a pack of wipes from the resident’s room back on the clean linen cart and disposed of the soiled bag without performing hand hygiene. The facility also failed to follow infection control practices when soiled linen was transported. A CNA exited a resident room carrying unbagged soiled linen in gloved hands, walked down the hallway, placed the linen in the soiled linen receptacle, removed her gloves, and then washed her hands after returning to the room. The CNA stated she knew not to bring unbagged soiled linen into the hall or wear soiled gloves, but said she was in a hurry. The DON stated that staff should perform hand hygiene before care, before applying gloves, after glove changes, and before leaving the resident room, that gloves should be changed during incontinent care when moving from soiled to clean, that soiled linens should be bagged for transport, and that residents requiring EBP should have gown and gloves for care.
Call Light Left Out of Reach
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure Resident #53’s call light was left within reach while she was in bed. Resident #53 was an elderly female admitted with dementia, and her significant change MDS indicated severely impaired cognition for decision making and dependence on staff for all ADLs. Her comprehensive care plan identified a potential for falls and directed staff to place the call light within reach for assistance. During observations on 02/23/2026, Resident #53 was found lying in bed with her call light attached to itself at the wall and out of reach, including at 11:06 am and again at 3:53 pm. On 02/24/2026 at 11:05 am, she was again observed in bed with the call light on the wall plug and out of reach, though she was able to demonstrate pushing the call light when it was handed to her. Staff interviews confirmed that residents should have access to their call lights, that the call light should be placed back within reach after rounds, and that Resident #53 should still have access to it even if she did not routinely use it. The facility policy titled Call Light Response also stated that the call light/bell should be placed within the patient’s reach regardless of location, including in bed.
Care Plans Not Updated After Assessments
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for 2 of 12 residents reviewed. Resident #35, a female with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, hypertension, and peripheral vascular disease, had an annual MDS showing intact cognition, dependence for all ADLs, use of a motorized wheelchair, and dependence for mobility. However, her comprehensive care plan, revised on 02/16/2026, still listed transfers as partial and moderate assistance and did not reflect her current transfer status requiring a mechanical lift. Record review showed no order in the resident’s order summary related to transfer status or mechanical lift use at the time of review. During observation and interview, CNA A stated the Kardex did not list mechanical lift transfer interventions and explained that the resident had been unable to stand for transfers after returning from the hospital, so staff began using a mechanical lift. The CNA stated a new staff member would not know the correct transfer status if the Kardex was not accurate. The DON, Administrator, and Regional Reimbursement Consultant all acknowledged that the care plan had not reflected the correct transfer status and that the interdisciplinary team was responsible for updating care plans. Resident #53, a female with dementia, had a significant change MDS showing severely impaired cognition and a feeding tube. Her comprehensive care plan, revised on 10/13/2025, addressed the feeding tube but did not include the EBP requirement related to the feeding tube. Record review showed she returned from the hospital with a feeding tube and had an order for EBP related to the feeding tube. Observation confirmed an EBP sign outside her door and continuous tube feeding in place. Staff interviews indicated the care plan was incomplete, that nurses mainly followed orders, and that the MDS nurse was responsible for reviewing and revising care plans. The Regional Reimbursement Consultant and DON stated the care plan should have reflected the feeding tube and EBP requirement and that it had been missed.
Failure to Act on Pharmacy Consultant Recommendations for Antipsychotic Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the monthly drug regimen review recommendations from the consultant pharmacist were acted upon for Resident #34. The resident was admitted on 10/7/2024 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, dementia with anxiety, peripheral vascular disease, and atrial fibrillation. Active physician orders on 2/24/2026 included Seroquel 25 mg daily for dementia with behaviors, Seroquel 50 mg every morning and at bedtime for behaviors and anxiety, and trazodone 50 mg at bedtime for sleep insomnia. Pharmacy recommendations dated 1/24/2025, 2/20/2025, and 2/12/2026 stated that Seroquel 50 mg every morning needed a CMS-approved diagnosis to be continued. The quarterly MDS dated 12/20/2025 showed severe impairment in thinking with a BIMS score of 0, no behaviors during the look-back period, no psychiatric or mood disorders, and antipsychotic use during the 7-day look-back period. The drug regimen review did not show physician contact for the prescribed or recommended actions, and the care plan stated that psychotropic drug use was related to dementia with targeted or disruptive behaviors and that pharmacist recommendations, including suggested reductions, were to be forwarded to the physician. During interviews, the DON said she and the ADON were responsible for completing pharmacy recommendations and that she failed to review the consultant pharmacist’s recommendations and did not obtain an appropriate diagnosis for Seroquel, stating it had been missed. The NP said she had recently been contacted about the resident’s sleep pattern and that trazodone had been added, while the MD said he did not recall receiving the pharmacy recommendation requesting an appropriate diagnosis for Seroquel. The consultant pharmacist stated she had been reminding the facility monthly since January 2025 that an appropriate diagnosis was needed for continued use of Seroquel and that the facility had not responded in person.
Inaccurate Meal Intake Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain accurate medical records for one resident when an LVN documented meal intake that did not match what was observed and what other staff reported. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, dementia with anxiety, peripheral vascular disease, and atrial fibrillation. His record showed he was on a mechanical soft diet, was at risk for malnutrition/dehydration with unintended weight loss, and required substantial to maximal assistance with eating. A quarterly MDS also showed severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 0. On 2/23/2026, the LVN documented that the resident ate 100% of breakfast and 75% of lunch. However, the meal intake sheet for that day had no documentation for breakfast, lunch, or dinner. During observation that afternoon, the resident was found asleep in bed with his lunch tray untouched on the overbed table. Later that day, CNA D stated he had not eaten anything that day, including breakfast and lunch, and the lunch tray was still untouched. During interview the next day, the LVN said she could not remember the resident’s intake from the prior day and relied on her documentation, but also stated she had not offered him the lunch meal because it was cold and acknowledged the charting was incorrect and false documentation. The ADON and Administrator stated that meal intake should be documented daily and that incorrect entries should be corrected with an addendum if needed. The facility policy stated the clinical record is used to record, preserve, and communicate the patient’s progress and current treatment.
Resident Elopement Due to Inadequate Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent a resident from eloping from the facility. The resident, who had a history of cerebral infarction, dementia, and hyperlipidemia, was identified as being at high risk for elopement due to progressing dementia and signs of sundowning. Despite having a wander/elopement alarm device, the resident managed to leave the facility and was found in an empty lot with multiple hazards, approximately 550 feet behind the facility and 300 feet from a highway. The incident occurred when the resident eloped from the facility at 1:30 am. The alarm on the exit door was triggered, but initial checks by staff did not locate the resident. It was only after further searching that the resident was found outside and redirected back to the facility without injury. The resident was noted to have moderately impaired cognition, with a BIMS score of 9, and was independent in most activities of daily living, including ambulation. The facility's care plan for the resident included interventions such as checking the placement of the wanderguard every shift and using an audible monitoring system to alert staff of exit-seeking behaviors. However, these measures were insufficient to prevent the elopement. Staff interviews revealed that the alarm was heard, but there was a delay in locating the resident, indicating a lapse in the immediate response to the alarm and supervision of the resident.
Sanitation Deficiency in Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions in its only kitchen, as observed during a survey. Molded food items, including tomatoes, honeydew melons, and shredded mozzarella cheese, were found in the walk-in refrigerator. Additionally, whipped topping with a brown and sticky liquid, uncovered prepared pudding, and unsealed raw cookie dough were improperly stored. In another refrigerator, unsealed and unlabeled sliced cheese and french fries were also found. These observations indicate a lack of adherence to proper food storage and handling protocols. Interviews with kitchen staff revealed a lack of consistent responsibility for checking and discarding expired or moldy food. A dietary aide stated that he does not check the freezers or refrigerators, leaving the task to the cooks and dietary manager. The dietary manager admitted to regularly checking for expired food but was late due to an emergency on the day of the survey. The administrator acknowledged the responsibility for ensuring kitchen staff received appropriate training and expected daily checks of food quality and kitchen cleanliness. The facility's policy requires opened packaged frozen items to be sealed, labeled, and dated, which was not followed.
Privacy and Dignity Breaches During Care and Meal Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure personal privacy for three residents during care, as observed by surveyors. Resident #25, a female with dementia and intact cognition, was provided incontinent care without the privacy curtain being pulled, exposing her to her roommate and the hallway. Both CNAs involved acknowledged the oversight and admitted to being trained on privacy protocols. Resident #25 expressed feeling exposed and embarrassed due to the lack of privacy during care. Additionally, the facility did not maintain dignity during meal assistance for Residents #18 and #59. Both residents, who required supervision and assistance with eating due to cognitive impairments, were fed by staff members who stood over them rather than sitting. This action was acknowledged by the staff as potentially making residents feel intimidated or rushed. The staff involved were aware of the proper protocol to sit while assisting residents with meals but failed to do so due to the unavailability of chairs. Interviews with the Director of Nursing and the Administrator confirmed that all staff are expected to maintain resident privacy and dignity, as outlined in the facility's policy on resident rights. Training records indicated that all involved staff had completed resident rights training earlier in the year, yet the deficiencies in maintaining privacy and dignity were still observed.
Inconsistent Meal and Snack Times in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that no more than 14 hours elapsed between a substantial evening meal and breakfast the following day, unless a nourishing snack was provided at bedtime. Observations on two consecutive days showed that breakfast trays were being served to residents in their rooms after 9:00 AM, while supper was served around 6:00 PM, resulting in a meal span exceeding 14 hours. Residents reported that snacks were available at the nurse's station, but they had to request them, and diabetic residents did not receive snacks at night. Interviews with the Dietary Manager and other staff revealed inconsistencies in the preparation and distribution of evening snacks. The Dietary Manager acknowledged past complaints about sandwiches not being made for evening snacks and admitted there was no policy on meal and snack frequency. The Director of Nursing (DON) was unaware that sandwiches were not being distributed and expressed concerns about the potential effects of inconsistent mealtimes on residents' medication schedules. The facility's Administrator was aware of complaints about late breakfast service and acknowledged staffing challenges in the dietary department. Despite efforts to address these issues, the facility did not have a policy regarding mealtimes and snacks, contributing to the deficiency. The lack of a consistent meal schedule and the failure to provide nourishing snacks placed residents at risk of not having their nutritional needs met.
Failure to Provide Consistent Wound Care for Resident with Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary wound care treatment for a resident with pressure ulcers, as per professional standards of practice. The resident, who was admitted with severe cognitive impairment and required substantial assistance for all activities of daily living, had an unstageable pressure ulcer on the left heel and a stage 3 pressure ulcer on the right buttock. The treatment plan prescribed by the physician included specific dressing treatments for both pressure ulcers. However, the facility did not document the provision of wound care for the left heel on 3 out of 27 days and for the right buttock on 4 out of 27 days in October 2024. Interviews with facility staff revealed that wound care was not consistently performed when the treatment nurse was off duty. It was the responsibility of the RN on the floor to carry out wound care in the absence of the treatment nurse, but this was not always done. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the treatment nurse was responsible for wound care during her working days, and the charge RN or RN supervisor was expected to perform wound care when the treatment nurse was not available. The failure to adhere to the physician's wound care orders could lead to the deterioration of the resident's pressure ulcers.
Failure to Follow Respiratory Care Protocols
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards and care plans for a resident requiring such care. Specifically, the facility did not change the nebulizer mask, humidifier bottle, and tubing for the oxygen concentrator as per the physician's orders. The resident, who was cognitively intact, had a history of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, generalized anxiety disorder, Type 2 diabetes mellitus, and Chronic Kidney Disease. Observations revealed that the humidifier bottle attached to the oxygen concentrator was not changed weekly as ordered, and the nebulizer mask was not dated correctly, indicating a lapse in following the prescribed schedule for changing respiratory equipment. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator confirmed that the responsibility for changing the oxygen setup every Sunday was assigned to the night shift charge nurses. However, the equipment was not changed as required, and the dates on the equipment were not updated correctly. The facility's policy required disposable parts to be changed weekly and labeled with the date, but this was not adhered to, leading to a deficiency in the care provided to the resident.
Failure to Report Resident Elopement Incident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an alleged incident of neglect involving a resident who eloped from the facility and was found in the emergency room parking lot next door. The incident occurred on 4/14/24, and the administrator did not report it to the Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) within the required 24-hour timeframe. The administrator believed that the staff had maintained visual contact with the resident at all times, which led to the decision not to report the incident as an elopement. The resident involved was a female with a history of cerebral infarction, dementia, and hyperlipidemia. Her comprehensive care plan indicated she was at high risk for elopement due to her dementia and sundowning symptoms. Despite having a wander/elopement alarm device, the resident managed to leave the facility unnoticed, highlighting a lapse in the monitoring and response to the alarm system. Interviews with facility staff, including the Director of Nursing (DON) and the administrator, revealed a misunderstanding of the incident's severity and the reporting requirements. The facility's policies on missing residents and abuse/neglect were not followed, as the incident was not reported to the state agency as required. This oversight could potentially place residents at risk for harm and injury.
Resident Injury Due to Inadequate Securement in Facility Van
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and proper securement of a resident during transport, leading to an accident. The incident involved a male resident with a history of myocardial infarction, moderate cognitive impairment, and dependency for all activities of daily living. During transport in the facility van, the resident was not properly secured with a shoulder harness, resulting in him falling forward and striking his head, which caused a laceration and required emergency room care. Interviews with staff revealed that the van was equipped only with a lap belt, and there was no shoulder harness available or used. The van driver and CNA accompanying the resident were not trained on the necessity of a shoulder harness, and the maintenance director confirmed that the van lacked this essential safety feature. The absence of a shoulder harness was a critical oversight, as it could have prevented the resident from falling forward during transport. The facility's transportation policy and training procedures were inadequate, as they did not ensure the use of both lap and shoulder belts as required by federal regulations. The maintenance director and van driver were not aware of the need for a shoulder harness, and the facility's administrator was under the impression that both lap and shoulder belts were in use. This lack of proper training and equipment placed all residents using the facility van at risk of injury.
Failure to Ensure Timely Certification of Nurse Aides
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that four nurse aides, identified as NA B, NA C, NA D, and NA E, completed a nurse aide competency evaluation program within four months of their hire date. This deficiency was identified through observations, interviews, and record reviews. The staff roster and personnel files revealed that these nurse aides had been employed beyond the four-month period without completing the required training and competency evaluation program approved by the state. Despite receiving skills checkoff training by the facility staff, they were still scheduled to work without the necessary certification. Interviews with the staff, including NA D, revealed that she had been employed for three years and had not passed the written test of the CNA course despite multiple attempts. She was unaware of the four-month completion requirement and continued to perform nurse aide tasks under supervision. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and the Director of Nursing (DON) were also interviewed, and both were not fully aware of the four-month timeframe requirement. They mentioned that the administrator was responsible for enrolling nurse aides in the NATCEP program, but there was no system in place to ensure completion of the program within the required timeframe. The Administrator confirmed that there was no tracking system for ensuring the completion of the training program and that the facility had been using in-house training since the COVID-19 pandemic. The facility had transitioned to an online NATCEP program to address attendance issues with in-person classes. The Administrator was not aware that the four-month timeframe had resumed after the COVID waiver ended. The lack of a tracking system and awareness of the regulatory requirements contributed to the deficiency, potentially placing residents at risk of receiving care from inadequately trained staff.
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 15 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Crockett
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Winfield Rehab & Nursing | 0 mi | ★★★★★ | 14 | 0 |
| Houston County Nursing Home | 10.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Avir At Elkhart | 22.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Groveton Nursing Home | 25.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
| Trinity Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center | 26.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 37 | 3 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Whitehall Rehab & Nursing.
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.