Texas ›Houston

Copperfield Healthcare and Rehabilitation

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

7107 Queenston Blvd, Houston, TX 77095 (opens Google Maps) · Harris County · (281) 463-7333· 124 certified beds · avg 111 residents/day · certified since Aug 12, 2009 · 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 →

Part of chain: THE ENSIGN GROUP (342 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Sep 17, 2025
3
Serious findings on record
most recent Sep 17, 2025
$23,029
Fines, last 3 years
3.15
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Sep 17, 2025 · F-0700

The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly.

Why it matters: Improperly used bed rails can trap or injure residents — in the worst cases, causing serious harm.

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: Oct 11, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Sep 17, 2025 · F-0580 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away.

Why it matters: A family could learn about a serious injury or decline days later, after the chance to act has passed.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Oct 11, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Sep 17, 2025 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Oct 11, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 28 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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. · from a complaint F-0550

  2. K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern

    The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. F-0700

  3. J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated

    The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint F-0580

View all 28 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings

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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Apr 7, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0550
Sep 17, 2025▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700
Sep 17, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580
Sep 17, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Sep 17, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656
Sep 17, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694
Sep 17, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760
Sep 17, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Sep 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Sep 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Sep 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695
Sep 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Sep 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Mar 6, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Jul 26, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jul 26, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Jul 26, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655
May 18, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695
May 18, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 18, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
May 18, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 18, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 18, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
May 18, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677
May 18, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 18, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 12).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202390E
202430E
2025153K ▲
202610D

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.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

How to file a complaint about care →

1 fine totaling $23,029.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Sep 17, 2025Fine$23,029

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityTexas averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.15
Texas average: 3.46
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.58
Texas average: 0.44
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.67
Texas average: 3.04
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityTexas avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.153.463.95bottom 34% in Texas; bottom 19% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.580.440.69top 16% in Texas; bottom 50% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.673.043.50bottom 27% in Texas; bottom 15% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.440.340.48top 20% in Texas; top 42% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)55.055.345.8bottom 43% in Texas; bottom 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)50.054.642.9top 41% in Texas; bottom 39% in the U.S.

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 3.24, RN 0.60, weekend 2.74.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.24 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.

Quality measures: assessments & claims

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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Copperfield Healthcare and Rehabilitation. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Calculate a stay from a quote you receive

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.

Before you compare prices

  • Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
  • Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
  • Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

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 - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Liberty County Hospital District No 1Organization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%04/01/2017
Burnam, SoonIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE05/01/2016
Cardon, TrevorIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2017
Cardon, TrevorIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2017
Cardon, TrevorIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2017
Ensign Services INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/01/2016
Keetch, ChadIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2011
National Health Investors, INC.OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2017
Queenston Healthcare, INC.OrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2017
Queenston Healthcare, INC.OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/06/2025
Stratton, CharlesIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2005
Texas Nhi Investors, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2017
Zamora, NoeIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE10/06/2020
Zamora, NoeIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/06/2020
Zamora, NoeIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/06/2020

All 15 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain The Ensign Group — 342 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 341 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
  • "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "Who on your staff manages IV therapy, and what training and monitoring is in place?"
  • "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
  • "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Texas midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 55% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 15 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 59 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Cypress Pointe Health & Wellness2.5 miHouston, TX★★★☆☆3/5
Eagle Crest Rapid Recovery2.8 miHouston, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Cypress Creek Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center4.9 miCypress, TX★★☆☆☆3/5
Fallbrook Rehabilitation and Care Center5.7 miHouston, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Park Manor of Cyfair5.7 miHouston, TX★★★★★5/5
Solera at West Houston7.2 miHouston, TX★★★☆☆2/5
Legend Oaks Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center -7.5 miHouston, TX★★☆☆☆2/5
Paradigm at Woodwind Lakes7.9 miHouston, TX—/5SFF
Oakmont Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center of Ka8.1 miKaty, TX★★☆☆☆3/5
North Houston Transitional Care8.2 miHouston, TX★★★☆☆3/5
Misty Willow Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center8.3 miHouston, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Mason Creek Transitional Care of Katy9.0 miKaty, TX★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Harris, TX — 97 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.

All facilities in Houston →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 676230.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details