Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
The next survey window likely opens around November 2026
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 The Lakes At Texas City during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with a history of traumatic brain injury and craniectomy, who was totally dependent on two staff for ADL care, experienced a fall and injury when only one CNA remained at the bedside during a bed bath while the other left to retrieve linens. The resident slid off the bed and sustained a head injury, with no helmet in use and no physician order for one, despite family requests. Staff interviews confirmed the requirement for two-person assistance was not followed, leading to the incident.
The facility failed to provide scheduled showers to two residents who were dependent on staff for personal hygiene, due to staffing issues on the 2pm-10pm shift. Despite documentation indicating showers were given, resident interviews revealed that they often went weeks without proper bathing. The DON and Administrator were unaware of these issues, highlighting discrepancies in record-keeping and adherence to the facility's Quality-of-Life Policy.
The facility's kitchen failed to store and label food items according to professional standards, with several items in the walk-in cooler found unlabeled and undated. The Dietary Manager and facility administrator acknowledged the importance of labeling and dating food to prevent foodborne illness, as per the facility's policy.
A facility failed to respect the rights and dignity of three residents by not providing adequate privacy and accommodation for a consensual relationship between two residents. Despite their requests, the facility did not allow them to share a room or have private time, impacting their quality of life. Another resident was inconvenienced by being asked to leave her room to provide privacy for the couple. The facility's actions were inconsistent with its policy on resident rights.
The facility failed to transmit MDS assessments within the required 14-day period for several residents, with delays ranging from 15 to 42 days. This issue arose after the death of the former MDS nurse, leading to staffing challenges and a backlog in assessments. The new MDS nurse and the administrator acknowledged the delays, which could impact residents' care plans and services.
The facility failed to provide routine and emergency dental care for three residents, leading to a deficiency. Despite being cognitively intact and having care plans indicating dental issues, the residents reported pain and unmet requests for dental services. Interviews revealed systemic issues, including the absence of a visiting dentist and unaddressed referrals by the social worker.
A facility failed to update the PASRR Level 1 forms for a resident with an active diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder, resulting in the resident being deemed ineligible for PASRR specialized services. The Social Worker responsible for PASRR completion was unaware of the need to update the forms and lacked training on the process, potentially placing residents at risk of not having their special needs assessed and met.
The facility's kitchen was found to be unsanitary, with a dirty floor, unchanged mop water, and unclean deep fryer. The handwashing sink was cluttered, and the hand sanitizer dispenser was non-functional. Serving trays and bowls were not properly labeled, and there was no cleaning schedule. The Dietary Manager, recently promoted and uncertified, acknowledged the lack of sanitation, while the Administrator failed to notice the issues despite frequent visits.
The facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program, with rat and mice droppings found in the kitchen and a live roach in the dry food storage room. The Dietary Manager noted a hole in the kitchen allowing rats to enter, and despite regular pest control treatments, roaches persisted. The Administrator confirmed awareness of these issues, with pest control services conducted monthly and as needed.
A resident with a history of behavioral issues and multiple medical conditions was discharged from the facility without proper documentation or a formal discharge plan. The discharge was initiated due to the resident's behavior, but the facility failed to provide a written discharge summary or ensure continuity of care, violating federal regulations and facility policy.
Failure to Provide Adequate Supervision During ADL Care Resulting in Resident Fall and Injury
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when the facility failed to ensure that the environment was free from accident hazards and that a resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. The incident involved a male resident with a history of traumatic brain injury, craniectomy with no bone flap on the left side of his skull, tracheostomy, and a persistent vegetative state. The resident was totally dependent on at least two staff members for activities of daily living (ADL) care, including bed mobility and bathing, and was assessed as being at moderate risk for falls. On the day of the incident, two CNAs were providing a bed bath to the resident. One CNA left the bedside to retrieve clean linens, leaving the other CNA alone with the resident. During this time, the remaining CNA rolled the resident to his side, at which point the resident began to slide off the bed, with his forehead pressed against the wall. The second CNA returned and assisted the resident to the floor. The resident was found with a reddened area on the right side of his forehead. There was no helmet in use, and there were no physician orders for a helmet at the time, despite the family’s request for helmet use during repositioning due to the resident’s craniectomy. Interviews with staff confirmed that the resident required two-person assistance for all ADL care and that both staff members should have remained at the bedside during care. The failure to maintain two-person supervision during ADL care directly led to the resident’s fall and subsequent injury, which resulted in rehospitalization. The facility’s policy required staff to remain with residents during ADL care and to provide the necessary level of assistance based on the resident’s needs.
Failure to Provide Scheduled Showers to Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents who were unable to perform activities of daily living (ADL) were provided with necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene. Specifically, two residents, identified as Resident #3 and Resident #5, did not receive their scheduled showers. Both residents were cognitively intact, with BIMS scores of 15, and were dependent on staff for showering and personal hygiene. Resident #3, a male with multiple health conditions including paraplegia and osteomyelitis, required assistance during bathing. Resident #5, a female with cardiorespiratory conditions and non-Alzheimer's dementia, was also dependent on staff for bathing and personal hygiene. Interviews with residents and staff revealed that there were significant issues with staffing on the 2pm-10pm shift, which was responsible for providing showers to certain residents. Residents reported that they were often told there were not enough staff to assist with showers, and some residents had gone weeks without a shower or bed bath. Staff interviews corroborated these claims, with CNAs acknowledging complaints from residents about not receiving showers and admitting that they sometimes marked showers as completed even when they were not. The Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator were unaware of the ongoing issues with shower schedules and staffing shortages. The facility's documentation indicated that showers were provided, but resident interviews contradicted this, suggesting discrepancies in record-keeping. The facility's Quality-of-Life Policy emphasized the importance of maintaining residents' well-being and self-esteem, but the failure to provide scheduled showers compromised these standards.
Improper Food Storage and Labeling in Facility Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to professional standards for food storage, preparation, distribution, and service in its kitchen, as observed during a survey. Specifically, the facility's walk-in cooler contained several food items that were not properly labeled or dated. These items included leftover cake, a can of sliced apples in a partially covered container, food items in a grocery bag, an unidentified food product, leftover salad in a Ziplock bag, flour tortillas, and gallons of chocolate milk with expired use-by dates. The Dietary Manager acknowledged these issues, stating that all leftover food items and products removed from their original containers should be labeled and dated to prevent foodborne illness. During interviews, the Dietary Manager confirmed that serving expired milk could lead to foodborne illness and expressed that she would not use it. The facility administrator also stated that she expected all food items in the walk-in cooler to be labeled and dated. The facility's policy on frozen and refrigerated food storage requires items to be dated upon receipt unless they have a manufacturer use-by date. The failure to comply with these standards could potentially affect residents receiving meals from the kitchen, placing them at risk for foodborne illness.
Failure to Uphold Resident Rights and Privacy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to uphold the rights of three residents, leading to a deficiency in maintaining their dignity and quality of life. Resident #42, a male with intact cognition and several medical conditions, was involved in a consensual relationship with Resident #66, a female also with intact cognition and multiple diagnoses. Both residents were their own responsible parties and had expressed a desire to be together, yet the facility did not provide them with the opportunity to share a room or have private time together. This lack of accommodation was despite the residents' requests and the facility's acknowledgment of their relationship in their care plans. Resident #44, who shared a room with Resident #66, was affected by the facility's failure to provide privacy for Residents #42 and #66. She was asked to leave her room to allow the couple private time, which she and Resident #42 found uncomfortable. The facility's administrator acknowledged the issue but cited a lack of available rooms that could accommodate a male and female together due to shared bathroom arrangements. The facility had suggested discharging the couple to an assisted living facility, but they refused. The facility's admission policy emphasizes the residents' rights to a dignified existence, self-determination, and reasonable accommodation of individual needs and preferences. However, the facility's actions did not align with these policies, as they failed to provide the necessary accommodations for the residents' relationships and privacy needs. This oversight resulted in a deficiency related to the residents' rights and quality of life.
Delayed MDS Assessment Transmissions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to electronically transmit Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments within the required 14-day period after the Assessment Reference Date (ARD) for eight residents. This deficiency was identified through record reviews and interviews, revealing that the assessments for these residents were significantly delayed. For instance, Resident #9's annual MDS assessment was transmitted 27 days after the ARD, while Resident #33's admission MDS was transmitted 37 days late. Other residents, including Residents #44, #50, #66, #75, CR #79, and #382, also experienced delays ranging from 15 to 42 days past the ARD. The delays in transmitting MDS assessments were attributed to staffing challenges following the death of the former MDS nurse in February. The facility relied on corporate nurses temporarily until a new MDS nurse was hired in March. The newly appointed MDS nurse, who began working with MDS assessments in April, acknowledged the backlog and was in the process of catching up on the assessments. The MDS nurse and the facility administrator both recognized that these delays could impact the residents' care plans and the provision of appropriate care. The CMS Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual specifies that admission assessments must be completed within 14 days of admission, and other comprehensive MDS assessments must be completed within 14 days of the ARD. The facility's failure to adhere to these timelines for multiple residents indicates a systemic issue in managing MDS assessments, potentially affecting the residents' care and Medicaid payments.
Failure to Provide Dental Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to assist residents in obtaining routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for three residents, leading to a deficiency in dental services. Resident #9, a cognitively intact female with multiple diagnoses including anxiety disorder and major depressive disorder, was found to have obvious or likely cavities or broken teeth. Despite being care planned for dental issues, she reported experiencing dental pain and had not seen a dentist since her admission. Her care plan included monitoring for oral problems and referring to a dentist, but these interventions were not effectively implemented. Resident #42, a cognitively intact male with conditions such as hypertension and diabetes, also had obvious or likely cavities or broken teeth. His care plan included daily oral care and monitoring for dental issues, but he reported that his requests to see a dentist were ignored. He had informed the social worker multiple times without receiving a response. Similarly, Resident #66, a female with PTSD and diabetes, was assessed with dental issues but lacked a care plan for dental care. She reported pain and loose teeth, yet her complaints to the social worker went unaddressed. Interviews with facility staff revealed systemic issues in addressing dental care needs. The social worker admitted to not assessing residents for dental issues and noted difficulties in securing a visiting dentist. The MDS coordinator confirmed that dental referrals were the social worker's responsibility, while the facility administrator acknowledged the absence of a regular visiting dentist. The facility's policy on dental care services was requested but not provided, indicating a lack of structured procedures to ensure residents receive necessary dental care.
Failure to Update PASRR Level 1 Forms for Resident with Bipolar Disorder
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to coordinate assessments with the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) program for a resident who was reviewed for PASRR. Specifically, the facility did not update the PASRR Level 1 forms for a resident to indicate a mental health illness, despite the resident having an active diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder. The resident's face sheet indicated that she was a 69-year-old female with a documented onset of Bipolar Disorder as of April 2024. However, the PASRR Level 1 Screening conducted in March 2024 did not reflect this mental health condition, leading to the resident being deemed ineligible for PASRR specialized services. The deficiency was further highlighted during an interview with the facility's Social Worker, who was responsible for completing the PASRR. The Social Worker confirmed that the PASRR Level 1 on admission was negative for mental illness and admitted to not knowing the requirement to submit an updated PASRR Level 1 form. The Social Worker also revealed a lack of training regarding PASRR and did not have a system in place to ensure timely and accurate completion of PASRR Level 1 assessments. This oversight could potentially place residents requiring PASRR services at risk of not having their special needs assessed and met by the facility.
Sanitation Deficiencies in Facility Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions in its only kitchen, as observed during a survey. The kitchen floor was stained and covered with crumbs and residue, and the mop water used for cleaning was dirty and unchanged. The deep fryer contained opaque, dark brown grease with food debris, and its exterior was unclean. The handwashing sink was cluttered and difficult to access, with a non-functional hand sanitizer dispenser nearby. Additionally, serving trays and bowls of food were not properly dated or labeled, and the kitchen lacked a documented cleaning schedule. Interviews revealed that the dietary staff were contracted, and the Dietary Manager was recently promoted and uncertified. The Dietary Manager admitted to not having a cleaning schedule and acknowledged the kitchen was not sanitary. The Administrator, who was in the kitchen multiple times a week, did not notice any issues. The facility's Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures were undated, and the FDA Codes require that equipment and surfaces be clean to sight and touch, which was not adhered to in this case.
Pest Control Deficiency in Kitchen and Food Storage Areas
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program, as evidenced by observations of rat and mice droppings in the kitchen area between the deep fryer and the stove, as well as in the mop closet. The Dietary Manager acknowledged the presence of a hole in the kitchen that allowed rats to enter at night, although she had not personally seen them. The facility had multiple glue rat traps placed around the kitchen, and the exterminator had visited the facility the day before the survey to spray for rodents. Additionally, a live roach was observed in the dry food storage room, and a dead roach was found in the freezer identified as the activity's freezer. The Dietary Manager reported that despite regular pest control treatments, the exterminator was unable to eliminate the roaches. The facility's Administrator confirmed awareness of the pest control issues and stated that the pest control company treats the facility monthly and as needed. Record reviews of pest control invoices indicated ongoing issues with German cockroaches and small flies in various areas of the facility.
Failure to Document and Plan Resident Discharge
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comply with discharge requirements for a resident, identified as CR #1, who was discharged without proper documentation and planning. The resident, a male with a history of cerebral infarction, mood disorder, schizoaffective disorder, and other medical conditions, was discharged to a local group home. However, the facility did not provide a written discharge summary or ensure that the discharge was documented in the resident's clinical record. This oversight placed the resident at risk of not receiving necessary care and services post-discharge. Interviews and record reviews revealed that the discharge was prompted by the resident's behavioral issues, including altercations with other residents. The facility's social worker indicated that the discharge was directed by the administrator due to these behaviors. Despite the resident's history of managed behavior through a reward system and ongoing psychiatric services, the facility did not conduct formal discharge planning with the resident or his responsible party. The social worker's notes and phone communications with the receiving facility were the only records of discharge planning. The facility's policy on admission, transfer, and discharge rights requires documentation of the reasons for discharge, especially when the resident's needs cannot be met in the facility. However, in this case, there was no documentation of the specific needs that could not be met, attempts to meet those needs, or the services available at the receiving facility. The lack of a formal discharge plan and documentation contravened the facility's policy and federal regulations, leading to the deficiency noted in the report.
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 144 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 14 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 Texas City
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bayou Pines Care Center | 0.8 mi | — | 4 | 1 |
| The Shoal | 1.1 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Seabreeze Nursing And Rehabilitation | 1.3 mi | — | 8 | 0 |
| Solidago Health And Rehabilitation | 4.6 mi | — | 9 | 0 |
| The Phoenix Post-acute | 6.3 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for The Lakes At Texas City.
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.