Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around August 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 Yoakum Nursing And Rehabilitation Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Call Light Not Within Reach: A resident with NPH, bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder, moderately impaired cognition, and high fall risk was observed sitting across the room from his bed with his call light hooked on a room divider curtain about 6 feet away. The resident said he would have to cross the room to get help, while CNA and MA staff stated they did not notice the call light was out of reach; the ADON also stated she did not think to place it within reach, and the DON confirmed it needed to be within reach so the resident could call for help.
MDS Assessment Did Not Reflect Fall History: A resident with NPH, bipolar disorder, and schizoaffective disorder had a quarterly MDS that did not code a reported fall, even though the resident stated he had fallen and the MDS nurse acknowledged the omission. The resident was assessed as moderately cognitively impaired, required moderate ADL assistance, used a walker, and was identified as high risk for falls in the FRA and care plan.
A resident with NPH, bipolar disorder, and schizoaffective disorder had a fall-risk care plan that listed a wheelchair and keeping the call light within reach, but staff observed his call light out of reach while he sat across the room from his bed. Interviews confirmed he actually used a walker, not a wheelchair, and multiple staff members acknowledged the call light was not placed where he could reach it.
A resident's representative reported concerns about care, including blood on linens and the absence of a bedside table, to an LVN. Despite these complaints, the LVN did not generate required grievance reports or follow the facility's grievance policy, resulting in the concerns not being formally addressed or resolved.
A resident with dementia and urinary retention experienced failed attempts by two LVNs to change an indwelling urinary catheter, with neither nurse documenting the unsuccessful procedures or the subsequent notification to the physician. The lack of detailed and accurate medical record entries did not meet professional standards for documentation.
The facility employed a Food Service Supervisor who did not meet the required certification, education, or experience qualifications to serve as Director of Food and Nutrition Services. The FSS had not obtained certification as a dietary manager and lacked the necessary degree or experience, and the facility was aware of these deficiencies at the time of the survey.
Surveyors found that the kitchen failed to discard spoiled salad mix, did not properly seal an opened bag of pinto beans in dry storage, and did not sanitize a blender used for pureed diets according to required procedures. These actions did not meet professional standards for food safety and sanitation.
A resident's MDS assessment was inaccurately coded to reflect receipt of an insulin injection, when in fact the resident was administered Trulicity, a non-insulin injectable for diabetes. Facility staff were unaware of the distinction, resulting in incorrect documentation on the assessment.
A resident with schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, and dementia did not have depression included as a focus area in her comprehensive care plan, despite this diagnosis being documented in her assessment and medical record. Facility staff confirmed the omission and acknowledged that the care plan should have addressed all identified needs, as required by facility policy.
A CNA was observed providing incontinent care to a resident with multiple chronic conditions, using a back to front wiping motion instead of the required front to back technique. The CNA believed she was using the correct method, despite having received training and passing a competency check. The DON confirmed the correct procedure and that staff are trained annually, and facility policy specifies front to back cleaning to prevent infection.
A resident with cognitive impairment had a personal refrigerator with a malfunctioning thermometer, leading staff to record inaccurate temperatures for several months. Housekeeping staff, responsible for monitoring, did not recognize or report the issue, and the facility's policy on safe food storage was not effectively implemented or communicated. This failure resulted in improper monitoring of food storage conditions for food brought in by families.
Two residents experienced issues with the misappropriation of Ativan in an LTC facility. A medication aide improperly removed a blister pack for one resident, leading to two missing tablets, while another resident's medication administration was not properly documented. The facility's failure to adhere to medication management protocols resulted in these deficiencies.
A facility failed to report an allegation of sexual abuse involving two residents to the State Survey Agency within the required timeframe. One resident with severe cognitive impairment alleged unwanted sexual favors from another resident with moderate cognitive impairment. The ADM reported physical abuse but failed to report the sexual abuse allegation separately, contrary to facility policy.
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program during a scabies outbreak involving two residents. The facility lacked written standards for reporting communicable diseases, which could delay outbreak identification and intervention. Despite implementing containment measures, the outbreak was not reported to the local health department or HHSC, as the facility believed it was not a reportable event.
A resident developed new wounds, but the facility failed to immediately inform the resident's representative, leading to a delay in communication. The resident, with multiple comorbidities, experienced a decline in health, including weight loss and wound development. Interviews revealed inconsistencies in communication and documentation practices among staff.
A resident with a history of traumatic subdural hemorrhage and dysphagia was inaccurately documented as NPO in their care plan, despite having a physician's order for a regular diet. The care plan was not updated to reflect the resident's current dietary needs, which could have led to inappropriate nutrition and fluid intake. Facility staff acknowledged the importance of accurate care plans for proper care and preventing harm.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and hemiplegia was found with a rubber band wrapped around his penis, indicating a failure in the facility's abuse prevention measures. The incident was discovered during a routine check, revealing inconsistencies in care and documentation by staff. The facility's policies on abuse prevention and reporting were not effectively implemented, leading to this oversight.
The facility failed to maintain the dignity of four residents who required assistance with dining when RN A referred to them as 'feeders' within their hearing. The residents were not responsive to interviews due to cognitive deficits. The DON and RN A acknowledged the need for more respectful language.
Call Light Not Within Reach
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure Resident #1’s call light was within reach. Resident #1 was a [AGE]-year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including normal pressure hydrocephalus, bipolar disorder, and schizoaffective disorder. His quarterly MDS reflected that he could understand others and be understood, had a BIMS score of 9 indicating moderately impaired cognition, required moderate assistance with ADLs, and used a walker for mobility. His FRA identified him as high risk for falls, and his care plan directed staff to be sure his call light was within reach because of his fall risk related to normal pressure hydrocephalus, unsteady gait, use of a wheelchair for mobility, and history of falls. During observation on 05/29/2026, Resident #1 was sitting in a chair across the room from his bed near the window, while his call light was hooked on the room divider curtain approximately 6 feet away and his walker was in front of him. In interview, he stated he would have to cross the room to get his call light if he needed help and that he would use it if it were located near him. CNA A stated she did not realize the call light was not within reach and missed it, and MA B stated she saw him up in a chair but did not think about the call light not being near him. The ADON stated she did not think about putting the call light within his reach earlier, and the DON stated the call light needed to be within his reach so he could call for help and not fall if he transferred himself. The facility policy stated staff will ensure the call light is within reach of the resident and secured, as needed.
MDS Assessment Did Not Reflect Resident Fall History
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure Resident #1’s quarterly MDS assessment accurately reflected his status because his fall on 04/15/2026 was not coded on the assessment dated [DATE]. Resident #1 was a [AGE]-year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including normal pressure hydrocephalus, bipolar disorder, and schizoaffective disorder. His quarterly MDS reflected that he could understand and be understood, had a BIMS score of 9 out of 15 indicating moderately impaired cognition, required moderate assistance with ADLs, and used a walker for mobility, but it did not indicate any falls since admission/entry or reentry or since the prior assessment. Record review showed Resident #1’s FRA dated 05/19/2026 identified him as high risk for falls, and his care plan dated 03/11/2026 included a focus on fall risk related to normal pressure hydrocephalus, unsteady gait, wheelchair use for mobility, and a history of falls. During interview, the resident stated he had fallen in April. The MDS nurse stated she did not know how she missed reflecting the fall on the quarterly MDS assessment, but she did. The DON stated the resident had fallen in April and May, but she could not provide the incident reports because they were part of the QA program. The CMS RAI Manual was also reviewed and reflected that the assessment must accurately reflect the resident’s status.
Care Plan Not Implemented for Call Light and Mobility Needs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for one resident reviewed for care plans. The resident had diagnoses including normal pressure hydrocephalus, bipolar disorder, and schizoaffective disorder. His quarterly MDS reflected that he could understand and be understood, had a BIMS score of 9 out of 15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, required moderate assistance with ADLs, and used a walker for mobility. His fall risk assessment identified him as high risk for falls, and his comprehensive care plan dated 03/11/2026 included a focus on fall risk related to normal pressure hydrocephalus, unsteady gait, use of a wheelchair for mobility, history of falls, and keeping the call light within reach. During observation, the resident was seated across the room from his bed with his call light hooked on the room divider curtain about 6 feet away, out of his reach, while his walker was in front of him. In interview, he stated he would have to cross the room to get the call light and that he would use it if it were near him; he also stated he had not used a wheelchair since admission and always ambulated with a walker. Staff interviews confirmed the care plan did not match his actual mobility status, as the MDS nurse, CNA, medication aide, ADON, and DON all acknowledged he used a walker and not a wheelchair, and that the call light needed to be within his reach. The DON stated the call light intervention was not implemented.
Failure to Document and Address Resident Grievances
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents had the right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal, as required by policy. Specifically, a resident's representative made two separate complaints to LVN A regarding the care provided: one about blood observed on the resident's linens, and another about the absence of a bedside table. Despite these grievances being communicated directly to LVN A, no grievance reports were generated for either incident. The resident in question was an elderly male with dementia, admitted for long-term care and requiring substantial assistance with activities of daily living, including care for an indwelling urinary catheter. The representative observed issues through a bedroom camera and contacted the facility to express concerns about possible bleeding related to the catheter and the removal of the bedside table. LVN A acknowledged receiving these complaints and documented some aspects in the nursing progress notes but did not initiate the formal grievance process as outlined in facility policy. Interviews with the facility's Administrator and DON confirmed that staff are expected to assist in generating grievance forms and submitting them for review. However, in these instances, LVN A did not follow the established grievance procedure, resulting in the grievances not being formally addressed or resolved. The facility's policy clearly states that all grievances should be documented and reviewed, but this process was not followed for the resident's representative's complaints.
Failure to Document Catheterization Attempts and Physician Notification
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain complete, accurate, and systematically organized medical records for a resident with dementia and urinary retention requiring an indwelling urinary catheter. Licensed vocational nurses (LVN A and LVN B) did not document failed attempts to change the resident's urinary catheter, nor did they record the report to the physician regarding the change in the resident's condition. The medication administration record indicated that the catheter was instilled, but there was no detailed documentation in the medical record about the procedure, complications encountered, or communication with the physician. The resident, an elderly male with dementia and an enlarged prostate, was admitted for long-term care and required substantial assistance with activities of daily living. Physician orders specified regular care and monthly changes of the indwelling urinary catheter. On the day of the incident, LVN A attempted to change the catheter but met resistance and had no urine return. She reported this to LVN B but did not document the details of the procedure or the nurse-to-nurse report. LVN B also attempted the procedure without success and subsequently contacted the physician, who ordered the resident's transfer to the hospital. However, LVN B also failed to document the sequence of events and communication with the physician in the medical record. Interviews with the resident's representative and facility staff confirmed the lack of documentation regarding the failed catheterization attempts, the resident's change in condition, and the physician notification. The facility's policy and professional guidelines require detailed documentation of such procedures, including assessment findings, complications, and communication with practitioners, but these were not followed in this case.
Unqualified Food Service Supervisor in Food and Nutrition Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to employ staff with the appropriate competencies and skill sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, as required by regulations. Specifically, the Food Service Supervisor (FSS) did not possess the necessary certification, education, or qualifications to serve as the Director of Food and Nutrition Services. The FSS was not a certified dietary manager or certified food service manager, did not have an associate's or higher degree in food service management or hospitality, and lacked two or more years of experience in the position of director of food and nutrition services in a nursing facility setting. Although the FSS had completed a course of study in food safety management, he had not yet taken the exam to become a certified dietary manager and was therefore not eligible for certification at the time of the survey. Interviews with facility staff confirmed that the FSS assumed the position without meeting the required qualifications, and the Administrator was aware of this deficiency. The FSS consulted periodically with a registered dietitian, but the dietitian was not employed full-time by the facility. The lack of appropriately qualified leadership in the food and nutrition service could impact the facility's ability to ensure food safety and adequate nutrition for residents, as required by federal regulations and the Food Code.
Deficient Food Storage, Preparation, and Sanitation Practices in Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to professional standards for food storage, preparation, and sanitation in the kitchen. During an observation, a 5-lb. bag of salad mix was found in the reach-in cooler with approximately 15% of the leaves brown or rotten, despite being labeled with the date it was received and opened. The Food Service Supervisor (FSS) confirmed that the salad mix should have been discarded, and all dietary staff were responsible for proper labeling, dating, and discarding of food items past their use-by dates. In the dry storage room, a 50-lb. bag of pinto beans was observed to be opened and rolled over, but not sealed or placed in a sealed bin or container. The FSS acknowledged that the beans should have been stored in a sealed container to prevent deterioration in food quality and potential contamination from pests. This practice was not in accordance with facility policy and federal food storage guidelines. Additionally, the facility did not properly sanitize the blender used to puree food for residents on modified diets. After use, the blender components were only rinsed in hot water, without the use of soap or sanitizing solution, and were not washed or sanitized in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions or facility policy. The staff member responsible for this task stated she was instructed to rinse with hot water only, and the FSS later confirmed that dietary staff had not been properly trained on correct sanitizing procedures.
Inaccurate MDS Assessment Due to Misclassification of Injectable Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's assessment accurately reflected their medication administration status. Specifically, a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for one resident was incorrectly coded to indicate that the resident had received an insulin injection during the look-back period. Review of the resident's medical records, including physician orders and medication administration records, showed that the resident was prescribed and received Trulicity, a non-insulin injectable medication, for Type 2 diabetes mellitus. There was no order or documentation of insulin administration for this resident during the relevant period. Interviews with the MDS LVN, Regional Care Manager, and Administrator revealed that the nursing staff was unaware that Trulicity is not classified as insulin, leading to the incorrect coding on the MDS assessment. The facility relied on the RAI manual for MDS coding guidance and did not have a separate policy addressing this issue. The error was identified through review of the resident's records and staff interviews, confirming that the assessment did not accurately reflect the resident's actual medication regimen.
Failure to Include Depression in Comprehensive Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan that addressed all of a resident's identified needs. Specifically, a resident with diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, and dementia did not have depression listed as a focus area in her comprehensive care plan, despite this diagnosis being documented in her medical record and assessment. The resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) indicated active depression, and the psychiatric nurse practitioner's note also addressed major depressive disorder as a primary diagnosis. Interviews with facility staff, including the MDS LVN, Regional Care Manager, and Administrator, confirmed that depression was omitted from the care plan and acknowledged that it should have been included, regardless of whether the resident was receiving medication for the condition. The facility's policy requires that all identified needs from the comprehensive assessment be included in the care plan with measurable objectives and timeframes, but this was not followed in the case of this resident.
Improper Perineal Care Technique Observed During Incontinent Care
Penalty
Summary
A certified nursing assistant (CNA) provided incontinent care to a resident with dementia, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and major depressive disorder, who was frequently incontinent of bladder and bowel and required assistance with activities of daily living. During the observed care, the CNA cleaned the resident's buttocks using a back to front motion, contrary to the facility's policy and standard infection control practices, which require cleaning from front to back to prevent contamination of the urethra. The CNA confirmed during an interview that she used a back to front motion and believed it was the correct technique, despite having received training and passing a competency check on perineal care earlier in the year. The Director of Nursing (DON) verified that the correct method is front to back and that staff receive annual training and skills checks on infection control and incontinent care. Facility policy also specifies cleaning from front to back. This improper technique was directly observed and acknowledged by both the CNA and the DON.
Failure to Monitor and Ensure Safe Storage of Resident Food Brought from Outside
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement and enforce a policy regarding the use and storage of foods brought in by family and visitors for residents, specifically in the case of one resident with Alzheimer's disease, dementia, hypertension, and depression. The resident, who had moderately impaired cognition and required assistance with eating, had a personal refrigerator in her room. Observations revealed that the thermometer inside the refrigerator was not functioning properly, as it displayed a temperature of 26 degrees F while the contents, such as an open can of soda, were not frozen. Despite this, staff continued to record and log inaccurate refrigerator temperatures for five months, with recorded temperatures ranging from 12 to 34 degrees F. Interviews with staff indicated that housekeeping was responsible for recording refrigerator temperatures, but they failed to recognize or report the malfunctioning thermometer to nursing staff. The facility's policy required safe food handling and storage, including maintaining refrigerator temperatures at or below 40 degrees F, but staff were not adequately educated on the correct temperature range. The lack of a functioning thermometer and accurate temperature monitoring could have resulted in unsafe storage conditions for food brought in by families, potentially placing residents at risk.
Misappropriation of Medications in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect residents from the misappropriation of their medications, specifically Ativan, for two residents. For Resident #4, the issue arose when a Certified Medication Aide (MA G) removed a blister pack of Ativan from the medication cart and handed it to a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN A) without following proper procedures. The blister pack, which initially contained two tablets, was later found empty at the nurse's station, and the whereabouts of the two missing tablets could not be determined. Interviews with the involved staff revealed discrepancies in their accounts of the incident, and the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the proper protocol was not followed, which included verifying the count with another nurse before removing the medication. For Resident #5, the deficiency involved the failure of MA G to sign off after administering a scheduled dose of Ativan. Although the narcotic count was correct, the lack of a signature on the medication administration record (MAR) created a discrepancy that could lead to medication errors or diversion. The DON emphasized the importance of adhering to the facility's medication administration policy to prevent such issues. Both incidents highlight a failure in the facility's medication management processes, particularly concerning controlled substances. The facility's policy requires that medications be administered and documented accurately to prevent contamination, infection, and discrepancies. The failure to follow these procedures resulted in the misappropriation of medications and potential risks to resident safety.
Failure to Report Alleged Sexual Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of abuse involving two residents to the State Survey Agency within the required timeframe. Resident #6, who has severe cognitive impairment, alleged that Resident #7, who has moderate cognitive impairment, provided unwanted sexual favors. This allegation was not reported to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) as required by the facility's policy. The Director of Nursing (DON) was unaware if the allegation was reported, as the Administrator (ADM) was responsible for reporting such incidents. During the investigation, the ADM identified two allegations: physical abuse, which was reported, and sexual abuse, which was not. The ADM mistakenly incorporated both allegations into a single investigation for physical aggression, failing to report and investigate the sexual abuse allegation separately. This oversight in reporting could potentially affect any resident and contribute to further abuse, as the facility did not adhere to its policy of reporting all alleged violations within the specified timeframes.
Inadequate Infection Control Reporting During Scabies Outbreak
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by the lack of written standards specifying when and to whom possible incidents of communicable diseases or infections should be reported. This deficiency was identified during a review of the facility's handling of a scabies outbreak involving two residents. The facility's policy did not address the reporting of communicable diseases to the Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC), which could delay the identification of infectious outbreaks and hinder timely follow-up interventions. The first resident involved was a 94-year-old female with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including unspecified dementia and glaucoma. She was found to have a rash and was later diagnosed with scabies following a skin biopsy. The second resident, also a 94-year-old female with severe cognitive impairment, was diagnosed with scabies after her family noticed spots on her abdomen. Both residents received treatment for scabies, and enhanced barrier precautions were implemented. Interviews with facility staff, including the Director of Nursing (DON) and Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs), revealed that the outbreak was contained through skin assessments, prophylactic treatment, and deep cleaning of affected areas. However, the facility did not report the outbreak to the local health department or HHSC, as they believed it was not a reportable event. The source of the scabies was undetermined, and the facility's infection prevention program lacked specific guidelines for reporting such incidents.
Failure to Notify Resident's Representative of Significant Change
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to immediately inform a resident, their physician, and the resident's representative of a significant change in the resident's condition. Specifically, a resident developed new wounds on August 1, 2024, but the resident's representative was not informed until the following day. This delay in communication could potentially lead to decisions being made without the resident's designated surrogate or representative being involved, thereby denying the resident their rights and preferences. The resident in question was a 72-year-old male with a history of post-cholecystectomy syndrome, kidney stones, type 2 diabetes, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke, peripheral vascular disease, and osteoarthritis. The resident was admitted without any wounds, but due to his comorbidities and declining health, he developed arterial wounds. The resident was also noted to have refused to eat, which contributed to his weight loss and further health decline. Despite the presence of the resident's representative in the facility, there was a lack of documentation and communication regarding the new wounds that developed. Interviews with facility staff revealed inconsistencies in communication and documentation practices. Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) and the Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged that while verbal communication with the resident's representative occurred, it was not consistently documented. The resident's representative confirmed that they were not informed about the new wounds identified on August 1, 2024, until later. This lack of timely notification and documentation highlights a deficiency in the facility's communication and record-keeping processes.
Inaccurate Care Plan for Resident's Dietary Needs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a comprehensive person-centered care plan was accurately maintained for a resident, leading to a deficiency in care planning. The resident, a male with a history of traumatic subdural hemorrhage and dysphagia, was inaccurately documented as NPO (nothing by mouth) in his care plan, despite having a physician's order for a regular diet with mechanical soft texture and regular liquids. This discrepancy was noted in the care plan, which was undated and did not reflect the resident's current dietary needs as of June 18, 2024. The resident's care plan continued to indicate NPO status, which was initiated on June 12, 2024, even though the resident had been receiving oral intake since sometime in June. Interviews with facility staff, including LVNs and the DON, revealed that the care plan was not updated to reflect the resident's current dietary status, which could have led to the resident not receiving appropriate nutrition and fluids. The staff acknowledged the importance of accurate care plans for providing proper care and preventing potential harm. The facility's policy on comprehensive care plans emphasized the need for measurable objectives and timeframes to meet residents' needs, but this was not adhered to in the case of the resident in question.
Failure to Protect Resident from Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from abuse when a rubber band was discovered wrapped multiple times around the shaft of his penis. This incident was identified as past non-compliance, with the deficiency occurring on a specific date and being corrected before the state's investigation began. The resident involved was a male with severe cognitive impairment, hemiplegia, and other medical conditions, making him dependent on staff for all activities of daily living, including toileting and personal hygiene. The deficiency was discovered when a CNA found the rubber band during a routine check and immediately notified the nursing staff. The resident had been in bed since the previous evening, and there were inconsistencies in the care provided by the staff on duty. Interviews with staff revealed that the resident was not checked for incontinence as required, and there was a lack of documentation regarding the care provided. The DON and other staff members did not perform the necessary checks, and the resident's condition was not adequately monitored, leading to the oversight. The facility's policies on abuse prevention and reporting were not effectively implemented, as evidenced by the failure to identify and prevent the abuse. The staff involved did not follow proper procedures for incontinence checks, and there was a lack of communication and documentation regarding the resident's care. The incident highlighted significant gaps in the facility's ability to protect residents from abuse and ensure their safety and well-being.
Failure to Maintain Resident Dignity During Mealtimes
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to promote and maintain the residents' right to be treated with respect and dignity for four residents who required assistance with dining. During an observation, RN A referred to these residents as 'feeders' within their hearing, which could potentially harm their self-image. The residents in question were not responsive to interviews due to cognitive deficits, making it difficult to assess their immediate reactions to the incident. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and RN A revealed that more respectful language should have been used. The DON acknowledged the need for appropriate terminology and mentioned that training had been provided to staff regarding dignity and respect. The facility's policy on maintaining resident dignity during mealtimes emphasizes the importance of promoting and maintaining resident dignity, which was not adhered to in this instance.
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 64 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 Yoakum
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paradigm At Stevens | 2 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Shiner Nursing And Rehabilitation Center Inc | 9.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 13 | 0 |
| Hallettsville Nursing And Rehabilitation | 13.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 10 | 0 |
| Stevens Nursing And Rehabilitation Center Of Halle | 14.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 11 | 0 |
| Whispering Oaks Rehab & Nursing | 16.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Yoakum Nursing 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.