508 Pierce St, Lindale, TX 75771 (opens Google Maps) · Smith County · (903) 352-3727· 90 certified beds · avg 60 residents/day · certified since Jan 25, 1996 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · how star ratings work →
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Dec 27, 2024 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 28, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Dec 27, 2024 · F-0607 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Why it matters: Without working prevention policies, mistreatment is more likely to happen and less likely to be caught.
Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 28, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 27, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 28, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. F-0692
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. F-0842
The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. F-0550
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 18, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Mar 18, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Mar 18, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Mar 18, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Mar 18, 2026 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640 |
| Nov 25, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility could not meet the required nurse staffing levels but did not request the official waiver that the rules require in that situation. · F-0731 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Dec 27, 2024 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Dec 27, 2024 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint · F-0607 |
| Dec 27, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jul 10, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jul 10, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Dec 12, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725 |
| Dec 12, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727 |
| Dec 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 5).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 5 | 3 | K ▲ |
| 2025 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 5 | 0 | E |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $247,572.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 27, 2024 | Fine | $247,572 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Texas avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.50 | 3.46 | 3.95 | top 34% in Texas; bottom 37% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.30 | 0.44 | 0.69 | bottom 29% in Texas; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.27 | 3.04 | 3.50 | top 25% in Texas; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.16 | 0.34 | 0.48 | bottom 11% in Texas; bottom 7% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 55.3 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 54.6 | 42.9 | — |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.51, RN 0.30, weekend 3.27.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.51 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Colonial Nursing & Rehabilitation Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Individual
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hopkins County Hospital District | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 03/31/2017 |
| Smith, Michael | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2021 |
| Smith, Michael | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2021 |
All 3 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avir at Lindale | 0.7 mi | Lindale, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Mineola Gardens Wellness & Rehabilitation | 11.4 mi | Mineola, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Greenbrier Nursing & Rehabilitation Center of Tyle | 11.6 mi | Tyler, TX | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Avir at Mineola | 12.4 mi | Mineola, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Watkins-Logan-Garrison Texas State Veteran's Home | 12.7 mi | Tyler, TX | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Avir at Petal Hill | 13.7 mi | Tyler, TX | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Avir at Rose Trail | 13.7 mi | Tyler, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Van Healthcare | 13.9 mi | Van, TX | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Chandler Nursing Center | 14.4 mi | Chandler, TX | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Briarcliff Health Center | 14.5 mi | Tyler, TX | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Park Place Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 14.6 mi | Tyler, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Avir at Azalea Heights | 14.7 mi | Tyler, TX | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Smith, TX — 17 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 675563.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details