Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Avir At Enchanted Rock during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
An Activity Director assisted a resident with eating and then passed and set up meal trays for three other residents without performing hand hygiene between contacts, despite a facility policy requiring hand hygiene before and after resident contact and after touching the resident’s environment. The involved residents had conditions including dementia, DM2 with complications, acute kidney failure, visual impairment, post-CVA speech deficits, and joint pain, and required varying levels of assistance with eating. The Activity Director reported she did not sanitize or wash her hands because she did not directly touch food and prioritized delivering trays quickly, and she was unable to clearly recall or apply prior infection control training. The IP and an RN stated that staff are expected to use hand hygiene before and after resident contact and between each tray, and training records showed the Activity Director had completed hand hygiene and infection control education, although the IP later indicated staff had not been specifically trained on hand hygiene and there was no current DON.
A resident with Parkinson's disease and intellectual disabilities did not have PASARR Level II recommendations fully incorporated into their care planning and transitions, as the facility failed to submit accurate and timely requests for specialized therapy services in the LTC Online Portal within the required timeframe. Errors in the NFSS authorization type and lack of staff awareness of submission deadlines contributed to the deficiency.
The facility did not ensure pharmaceutical services were provided to meet each resident's needs and failed to employ or obtain a licensed pharmacist, resulting in a lack of required pharmaceutical oversight.
The facility did not post daily nurse staffing information in a visible location as required, and failed to retain staffing records for the mandated period. Observations found no current postings, and the responsible staff were unaware of the requirements, with the last posting occurring months prior. Facility policy required daily posting and 18-month retention, which was not followed.
The facility failed to develop and implement baseline care plans within 48 hours for three residents, as required by policy. Interviews revealed confusion among staff regarding the timeline and responsibilities for completing these plans. The residents had various medical conditions requiring timely care plans, but the lack of adherence to policy potentially placed them at risk of not receiving necessary care.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and significant physical assistance needs was found without access to a call light, which was placed out of reach on a recliner. The facility's policy requires call lights to be within reach to ensure residents can request assistance, but staff failed to comply, potentially compromising the resident's safety.
A facility failed to update a resident's DNR status in their care plan and physician orders, despite having a completed Texas OOHDNR. This oversight could result in unwanted CPR being performed. Staff interviews revealed a lack of communication and responsibility for updating the resident's code status, with the social worker and MDS Coordinator not ensuring the necessary changes were made in the electronic medical records.
A resident with multiple sclerosis and major depressive disorder alleged verbal abuse by a CNA, claiming inappropriate comments were made about her body. Despite the resident's grievance and an internal investigation by the DON, the incident was not reported to the State Survey Agency as required. The Administrator was unaware of the incident, assuming the DON would manage such grievances according to policy.
A facility failed to investigate and report an allegation of verbal abuse involving a resident with multiple sclerosis and major depressive disorder. The resident claimed a CNA made an inappropriate comment about her body. The DON conducted a limited investigation, concluding the incident was not reportable. The ADM stated grievances should be reported to the state survey agency if they involve abuse allegations.
A resident's Quarterly MDS Assessment failed to include a diagnosis of depression, despite the resident's care plan indicating the use of antidepressant medication. Interviews with facility staff revealed uncertainty about the omission, which could lead to confusion among physicians regarding the resident's care needs.
The facility failed to update care plans for two residents, one with a DNR order and another prescribed a TLSO back brace. The care plan inaccurately reflected a Full Code status for a resident with a DNR, risking unwanted CPR. Another resident's care plan lacked focus on a prescribed back brace, leading to inadequate support. Staff interviews revealed communication lapses and unawareness of necessary updates, contributing to these deficiencies.
Two residents experienced significant medication administration delays due to an LVN working in an as-needed position. One resident with multiple sclerosis received Baclofen late, while another with chronic pain and cognitive impairment had delays in receiving hydrocodone and ciprofloxacin. The facility's policy requires timely administration, but this was not followed, and the medication policy was not provided upon request.
A CNA failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) while providing catheter care to a resident with an indwelling suprapubic catheter, despite clear signage and available PPE. The CNA did not wear a gown, contrary to facility policy, which aims to prevent cross-contamination and infections. The Regional Nurse confirmed the requirement for gown and glove use during high-contact care activities.
A facility failed to provide adequate supervision for three residents, leading to significant safety concerns. One resident, with cognitive impairments, was found in another town after leaving the facility unsupervised. Another resident, diagnosed with dementia, was found outside the facility without supervision, and no follow-up assessments were conducted. A third resident managed to leave the facility without triggering door alarms, highlighting issues with safety device functionality and staff training.
The facility failed to update care plans for 16 residents identified as high risk for elopement, despite assessments indicating this risk. The care plans lacked measurable objectives and interventions to address elopement, contrary to facility policy. Interviews with the MDS nurse and DON revealed that care plans should be updated at admission, during a change of condition, and quarterly, but this was not done, leading to a significant deficiency in care planning.
A facility failed to report two incidents involving residents to the state agency. One resident with dementia eloped by taking a car and driving over 60 miles away, while another resident was found outside the facility but not reported as missing. Both incidents were not reported as required, and necessary assessments were not conducted, leading to deficiencies in resident care and safety.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and mobility issues experienced multiple falls due to inadequate supervision and failure to ensure safety measures, such as locking wheelchair brakes and keeping the call light within reach. Despite being at high risk for falls, the resident's environment was not consistently maintained to prevent accidents, leading to repeated injuries.
Failure to Perform Hand Hygiene During Meal Service and Tray Passing
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, specifically related to hand hygiene during meal service. An Activity Director assisted multiple residents with meals and meal tray delivery without performing hand hygiene between resident contacts, contrary to the facility’s handwashing/hand hygiene policy. The policy, dated 1/2025, states that hand hygiene is the primary means to prevent the spread of healthcare-associated infections and requires hand hygiene immediately before touching a resident, after touching a resident, and after touching the resident’s environment or contaminated surfaces. Record review showed that one resident was an older female with moderate dementia with mood disturbance, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neurological complications, and generalized muscle weakness. Her MDS indicated moderate cognitive impairment and a need for set-up/clean-up assistance with eating, and her care plan documented that she could eat with tray set-up and supervision. Another resident was an older male with acute kidney failure, type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, and blindness in one eye, with intact cognition and independence in eating, requiring only set-up assistance. A third resident was an older male with speech and language deficits following cerebrovascular disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, and joint pain, cognitively intact and independent with eating, with a care plan indicating he could eat with tray set-up and supervision. On the observed date at midday, the Activity Director was seen in the dining area holding a spoon and offering bites of food to an unidentified female resident, then repositioning the resident’s wheelchair and handing her the spoon, without performing hand hygiene afterward. She then went to the open kitchen door, spoke with staff, took a hallway meal cart, and began passing trays. She delivered and set up lunch trays in the rooms of the three identified residents, moving items on bedside tables and discarding an item in the trash, but did not wash or sanitize her hands between residents or while in or exiting their rooms. During interview, the Activity Director stated she did not perform hand hygiene because she did not directly touch the food and believed it was more important to deliver trays quickly so food would not get cold. She reported having received hand hygiene training but could not recall specifics and stated she did not know she was supposed to use hand hygiene between residents, after feeding, or when passing trays. The Infection Preventionist and an RN both stated that staff should use hand hygiene before and after resident contact, including contact with resident belongings and the environment, and between each tray. Training records showed the Activity Director had completed hand hygiene and infection control training in November 2025, while the Infection Preventionist later stated staff had been trained on basic infection control and influenza but not hand hygiene, and that there was no current DON at the facility.
Failure to Timely Submit PASARR Specialized Services Requests
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to incorporate recommendations from the PASARR Level II determination and evaluation report into a resident's assessment, care planning, and transitions of care. Specifically, the facility did not submit a complete and accurate request for nursing facility specialized services (NFSS) in the LTC Online Portal within 20 business days after the date of the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) meeting, as required. Record review showed that a resident with Parkinson's disease and intellectual disabilities was admitted and had a care plan that included a specialized wheelchair and recommendations for occupational and physical therapy (OT/PT) through the PASARR program. The IDT meeting discussed initiating therapy services, and the NFSS forms were completed for both OT and PT referrals. However, the NFSS forms were initially submitted with the incorrect Authorization Type as 'new' instead of 'restart,' resulting in denial and the need for resubmission. The Director of Rehabilitation (DOR) was unaware of the requirement to submit the NFSS within 20 business days from the last IDT meeting. Interviews confirmed that the facility did not have a PASARR policy in place and relied on state regulations. This failure to timely and accurately process the PASARR-related service requests led to the deficiency identified during the survey.
Failure to Provide Pharmaceutical Services and Licensed Pharmacist Oversight
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and did not employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist. This deficiency was identified during the survey process, indicating that the required pharmaceutical oversight and services were not in place for residents as mandated by regulations.
Failure to Post and Retain Daily Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to post daily nurse staffing information in a prominent location as required. Multiple observations on different dates and times revealed that the nurse staffing posting was not visible in the facility's halls. On one occasion, the most recent staffing sheet, dated several months prior, was found under the receptionist's counter rather than being displayed. Interviews with the administrator and receptionist confirmed that they were unaware of the requirement to post the staffing information daily and to retain these records for at least 18 months. The receptionist, who was responsible for posting the staffing sheet, admitted to having stopped this practice, with the last posting occurring several months before the survey. Record review showed that the facility's policy required daily posting of nurse staffing data, including the number of licensed and unlicensed nursing personnel responsible for direct care, within two hours of each shift's start. The policy also required that these records be kept for a minimum of 18 months or as required by state law. The failure to follow these procedures resulted in the absence of current staffing information being posted and a lack of retention of required records.
Failure to Implement Baseline Care Plans Within 48 Hours
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for three residents within 48 hours of their admission, as required by their policy. This deficiency was identified during a review of records and interviews with staff. The residents involved had various medical conditions, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type 2 diabetes, cognitive impairments, and fractures, which necessitated timely and individualized care plans to address their specific needs. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) revealed a lack of clarity and consistency in the process of completing baseline care plans. The DON stated that charge nurses were responsible for filling out the care plans, but there was a misunderstanding about the timeline, with some staff believing they had up to three days to complete them. Additionally, one LVN mentioned not being informed about the requirement to complete baseline care plans, indicating a communication gap within the facility. The facility's policy, revised in July 2024, clearly stated that baseline care plans should be developed within 48 hours of admission and include essential healthcare information. However, the failure to adhere to this policy resulted in the absence of completed baseline care plans for the three residents, potentially placing them at risk of not receiving the necessary care and services to meet their needs.
Failure to Ensure Call Light Accessibility for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident, identified as Resident #207, had access to a call light within reach, which is necessary for requesting assistance. During an observation, the call light was found on a recliner approximately three feet away from the resident, who was in bed and unable to reach it. Resident #207, who has moderate cognitive impairment and requires substantial assistance for various activities, was unaware of the call light's location. The resident's care plan specifically included the intervention to ensure the call light was within reach, highlighting the importance of this accommodation given her medical conditions, including fractures and muscle weakness. Interviews with staff, including a CNA and the DON, confirmed that the call light was not placed within reach, as required by the facility's policy. The CNA admitted to forgetting to return the call light to the resident's reach after her rounds, acknowledging that the resident would not have been able to reach it in its current position. The DON emphasized the importance of call lights for resident safety, noting that without access, residents might attempt to move independently, risking falls or other injuries. The facility's policy mandates that call lights be accessible to residents to ensure timely assistance, which was not adhered to in this instance.
Failure to Update Resident's DNR Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents have the right to formulate an advance directive and determine their choice regarding CPR. Specifically, for one resident, the facility did not obtain a DNR order or update the care plan after the completion of a Texas OOHDNR. This oversight could lead to staff performing CPR on a resident who did not wish to be resuscitated. The resident in question had a history of serious medical conditions, including hemiplegia, hemiparesis, and dementia, and was unable to complete a mental status interview. Interviews with staff revealed a breakdown in communication and responsibility regarding the resident's code status. The MDS Coordinator and the DON indicated that the social worker was responsible for updating the care plan and communicating changes in code status. However, this did not occur, resulting in the resident's care plan and physician orders incorrectly indicating a full code status. Staff members noted that code status information was typically communicated through the facility's electronic medical records system and the 24-hour report, but in this case, the necessary updates were not made, potentially leading to unwanted resuscitation efforts.
Failure to Report Alleged Verbal Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of verbal abuse involving a resident to the State Survey Agency within the required timeframe. The incident involved a resident with multiple sclerosis and major depressive disorder, who alleged that a CNA made inappropriate comments about her body. The resident, who had intact cognition, reported feeling frustrated and upset by the comments, which prompted her to file a grievance. Despite the grievance being investigated by the Director of Nursing (DON), the incident was not reported to the state agency as required by facility policy. Interviews revealed that the DON was informed of the incident by another CNA and conducted an investigation, during which the accused CNA denied making the specific comment. The DON concluded that the incident was not reportable, as she believed the resident did not use the exact phrasing in her complaint. The Administrator was unaware of the incident and assumed the DON would handle such grievances appropriately. The facility's policy mandates reporting all alleged violations to the appropriate authorities, but this was not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Investigate and Report Alleged Verbal Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that all allegations involving abuse, neglect, and misappropriation were investigated for one resident reviewed for abuse and neglect. Specifically, the facility did not report to the State Survey Agency an incident where a resident alleged that a CNA made an inappropriate comment about her body. The resident, who has multiple sclerosis and major depressive disorder, reported that the CNA told her that her clothes were too small and that her behind was too large. The grievance was investigated by the DON, who spoke to the CNA involved, who denied making the comment. The DON concluded that the incident was not reportable because the resident did not use the exact phrasing when questioned. The facility's policy requires an immediate investigation when there is suspicion or reports of abuse, neglect, or exploitation. However, the investigation conducted was limited to interviews with the alleged perpetrator and the victim, without further inquiry. The ADM stated that grievances should be responded to by appropriate parties and reported to the state survey agency if they involve allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or misappropriation. The ADM also noted that the investigation should have been more thorough than just interviewing the involved parties.
Omission of Depression Diagnosis in Resident's MDS Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to conduct an accurate comprehensive assessment of a resident's functional capacity, specifically omitting a diagnosis of depression in the resident's Quarterly MDS Assessment. The resident, a male with a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus and anxiety disorder, was admitted with a diagnosis of depression, which was not reflected in the MDS assessment. Despite the resident's care plan indicating the use of antidepressant medication and interventions for monitoring effectiveness, the MDS assessment only listed anxiety disorder under psychiatric/mood disorders. Interviews with facility staff revealed a lack of clarity regarding the omission. The LVN responsible for completing the MDS and care plans acknowledged the oversight, while the DON, who oversees the accuracy of MDS assessments, was also unsure why the depression diagnosis was not included. This oversight could lead to confusion among physicians regarding the resident's care needs.
Failure to Update Care Plans for DNR Status and Back Brace
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for two residents, which included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet their medical, nursing, and mental needs. For one resident, the care plan inaccurately reflected a Full Code status, despite the resident having a Texas Out of Hospital Do Not Resuscitate (OOHDNR) order completed by the Medical Power of Attorney. This discrepancy was not communicated effectively, leading to the risk of performing CPR against the resident's wishes. Interviews with staff revealed that the social worker was responsible for updating the care plan, but the MDS Coordinator was unaware of the need for revision. Another resident was prescribed a thoracic-lumbar-sacral orthoses (TLSO) back brace to be worn daily, but this was not included in the care plan. The resident occasionally refused to wear the brace, and the care plan lacked any focus, goals, or interventions related to the brace. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged that new orders should be reviewed and discussed by the interdisciplinary team (IDT) during morning meetings, but the care plan was not updated to reflect the brace requirement. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the intervention for the brace was added only after surveyor intervention. The facility's policy on comprehensive care plans emphasizes the need for person-centered care plans that include measurable objectives and timeframes. However, the failure to update the care plans for these residents placed them at risk of not receiving proper care and services. The lack of communication and coordination among staff members contributed to these deficiencies, as the care plans did not accurately reflect the residents' needs and preferences.
Medication Administration Delays
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents were free from significant medication errors, affecting two residents. Resident #2, diagnosed with multiple sclerosis and using a wheelchair due to bilateral impairments, received her Baclofen medication 32 minutes late. This medication is crucial for managing muscle stiffness and pain associated with her condition. The delay in administration was observed and recorded, indicating a lapse in adhering to the prescribed medication schedule. Resident #6, who suffers from chronic pain and severe cognitive impairment, experienced multiple delays in medication administration. Her hydrocodone, prescribed for pain relief, was administered late on two occasions: once by 3 hours and 10 minutes and another time by 1 hour and 25 minutes. Additionally, her ciprofloxacin, an antibiotic for a urinary tract infection, was given 2 hours and 10 minutes late. These delays were attributed to LVN O, who was working in an as-needed position and was running behind schedule. Interviews with staff revealed that LVN O was aware of the delays and had reported them to the Director of Nursing (DON). However, there was a lack of communication and support, as LVN P only learned of the situation independently and offered assistance. The facility's policy requires medications to be administered within one hour of the scheduled time, but this was not adhered to. Despite a request for the facility's medication administration policy, it was not provided, highlighting a gap in procedural compliance.
Infection Control Breach Due to Non-Compliance with EBP
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by an incident involving a certified nursing assistant (CNA) who did not adhere to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) while providing catheter care to a resident. The resident, who was admitted with conditions including benign prostatic hyperplasia, urinary retention, and obstructive uropathy, required EBP due to the presence of an indwelling suprapubic catheter. Despite the presence of signage and personal protective equipment (PPE) at the resident's room entrance, the CNA neglected to don a gown, although gloves were worn during the procedure. The CNA acknowledged awareness of the EBP protocol and signage but admitted to forgetting to don the gown. The Regional Nurse confirmed that the facility's policy required staff to wear both gloves and a gown during high-contact resident care activities to prevent cross-contamination and infections. The facility's policy on EBP was designed to reduce the transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms by mandating targeted gown and glove use during specific care activities, including those involving urinary catheters.
Inadequate Supervision and Elopement Risks in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and prevent accidents for three residents, leading to significant safety concerns. One resident, with a history of alcohol abuse and cognitive impairment, was found in another town after leaving the facility without supervision. Despite being identified as an elopement risk, the resident did not have a functioning wander guard, and staff failed to conduct required visual checks. The resident's absence was not immediately noticed, and the facility did not report the incident to the appropriate authorities, as advised by corporate risk management. Another resident, diagnosed with dementia and other cognitive impairments, was found outside the facility unsupervised. The resident was identified as an elopement risk, yet there were no skin assessments conducted after the incident to ensure the resident's safety. The facility did not report this incident, as the resident was still on the premises, and there was a lack of documentation and follow-up on the resident's condition post-incident. A third resident, also identified as an elopement risk, managed to leave the facility without triggering door alarms. The resident was found walking down the street and was brought back to the facility. Despite having a wander guard, the door alarms did not function as expected, and staff were not adequately trained on elopement procedures. The facility's failure to ensure proper functioning of safety devices and lack of staff training contributed to the resident's unsupervised exit.
Failure to Update Care Plans for High Elopement Risk Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive person-centered care plans for 16 out of 26 residents reviewed, specifically regarding their high risk for elopement. Despite the residents being identified as high risk through their Elopement Risk Assessments, their care plans did not reflect this risk, nor did they include measurable objectives and timeframes to address it. This oversight was contrary to the facility's policy, which mandates that care plans include strategies and interventions for residents identified as at risk for wandering or elopement. The report highlights that the care plans for these residents were not updated to reflect their high elopement risk, even though the facility's policy requires such updates. Interviews with the MDS nurse and the DON revealed that care plans are supposed to be updated at admission, during a change of condition, and quarterly. However, the MDS nurse could not explain why the care plans lacked goals or interventions for elopement risk, and the DON acknowledged that the care plans should have been updated as they drive the care provided by the staff. The facility's policy on wandering and elopements, revised in March 2019, states that residents identified as at risk should have care plans that include strategies to maintain their safety. Additionally, the facility's comprehensive care plan policy from July 2022 requires that care plans be reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each comprehensive and quarterly MDS assessment. Despite these policies, the care plans for the residents in question did not reflect their high risk for elopement, indicating a significant deficiency in the facility's care planning process.
Failure to Report Elopement and Neglect Incidents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report two significant incidents involving residents to the state agency within the required timeframe. The first incident involved a resident with a history of alcohol abuse and dementia who eloped from the facility by taking a car from the parking lot and driving over 60 miles away. Despite the involvement of police and the resident being found in another town, the facility's COO directed staff not to report the incident to the Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC). The resident did not have a wander guard bracelet, and the facility's front doors did not lock overnight, contributing to the elopement. The second incident involved another resident who was identified as an elopement risk due to dementia and impaired safety awareness. This resident was found outside the facility on a sidewalk by an Activities Director (AD) after an alarm sounded. Although the resident was redirected back inside, no skin assessment was conducted, and the incident was not reported to the state agency because the resident was still on the premises. The facility's policy required a skin assessment and incident report, but these were not completed. Both incidents highlight the facility's failure to adhere to its policies and state regulations regarding the reporting of elopements and potential neglect. The lack of timely reporting and appropriate follow-up actions could place residents at risk of harm. The facility's policies on wandering and elopements, as well as abuse, neglect, and exploitation, were not followed, leading to deficiencies in the care and safety of the residents involved.
Failure to Prevent Falls for High-Risk Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe environment for a resident, identified as Resident #1, who was at high risk for falls due to severe cognitive impairment and physical limitations. The resident's medical history included unspecified dementia, abnormalities of gait and mobility, lack of coordination, and cognitive communication deficit. Despite these conditions, the nursing staff did not consistently ensure that the resident's wheelchair brakes were locked when not in use, nor was the call light always within reach as per the resident's care plan. Resident #1 experienced multiple falls over several months, with incidents occurring both when attempting to transfer from the wheelchair and while in bed. These falls resulted in various injuries, including lacerations and bruising. Observations revealed that the resident's environment was not adequately supervised or arranged to prevent these accidents. For instance, the wheelchair was often found unlocked, and the call light was not always accessible, which contributed to the resident's attempts to move independently despite needing assistance. Interviews with staff members, including CNAs and the DON, confirmed awareness of the resident's high fall risk and the necessary precautions that should have been in place. However, lapses in following these precautions were evident, such as failing to lock the wheelchair or ensure the call light was within reach. These oversights in care and supervision directly contributed to the resident's repeated falls and injuries, highlighting a deficiency in maintaining a safe environment for residents at risk of accidents.
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 38 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 1 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 Fredericksburg
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avir At Fredericksburg | 0.3 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| Knopp Nursing & Rehab Center Inc | 0.5 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Knopp Healthcare And Rehab Center Inc | 1.9 mi | — | 9 | 0 |
| Avir At Comfort | 20.2 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Hilltop Village Nursing And Rehabilitation | 20.9 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Avir At Enchanted Rock.
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 August 2026) and official state health department websites.