Texas ›Wylie

Garnet Hill Rehabilitation and Skilled Care

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

1420 McCreary Rd, Wylie, TX 75098 (opens Google Maps) · Dallas County · (972) 442-6776· 128 certified beds · avg 90 residents/day · certified since Aug 28, 2008 · 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: STONEGATE SENIOR LIVING (24 facilities, chain avg rating 2.4★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 23, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 6, 2024
$31,959
Fines, last 3 years
3.53
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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, isolated · Dec 6, 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 (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: Dec 7, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 8, 2023 · F-0689

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: Jan 5, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 38 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    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

  2. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. F-0605

  3. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. F-0687

View all 38 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
Jun 11, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 23, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · F-0605
Apr 23, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687
Apr 23, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
Apr 23, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694
Apr 23, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Jul 16, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0677
Jul 16, 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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Jul 16, 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. · from a complaint · F-0695
Jul 16, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0755
Mar 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role. · from a complaint · F-0551
Mar 19, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0755
Mar 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
Jan 24, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583
Jan 24, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint · F-0812
Jan 24, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0641
Jan 24, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · from a complaint · F-0690
Jan 24, 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. · from a complaint · F-0695
Dec 6, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · from a complaint · F-0690
Dec 6, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Dec 6, 2024D · 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
Dec 8, 2023▲ G · Actual 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
Dec 8, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint · F-0812
Dec 8, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558
Dec 8, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Dec 8, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0677
Dec 8, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Dec 8, 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
Dec 8, 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
Dec 8, 2023D · 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. · F-0550
Dec 8, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604
Dec 8, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Dec 8, 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
Dec 8, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 8, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657
Dec 8, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
Dec 8, 2023D · 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (5 → 5).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023161G ▲
202441J ▲
2025120E
202660E

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 →

2 fines totaling $31,959.

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
Dec 6, 2024Fine$18,179
Dec 8, 2023Fine$13,780

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: 3.53
Texas average: 3.46
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.56
Texas average: 0.44
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.16
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)3.533.463.95top 33% in Texas; bottom 38% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.560.440.69top 19% in Texas; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.163.043.50top 31% in Texas; bottom 40% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.550.340.48top 10% in Texas; top 28% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)31.355.345.8top 7% in Texas; top 17% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)41.254.642.9top 34% in Texas; top 49% 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 3.64, RN 0.58, weekend 3.25.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.64 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Garnet Hill Rehabilitation and Skilled Care. 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
South Limestone Hospital DistrictOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%02/27/2015
Allison, JenniferIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/14/2019
Anene, SylviaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/17/2025
Anene, SylviaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/17/2025
Campbell, ScottIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/02/2025
Chance, JamesIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/04/2025
Fisher, JamesIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/04/2025
Langdon, ThomasIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/02/2025
Lifetime Wellness, LTD.OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/23/2021
Martus Financial Services, INC.OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/31/2023
McGehee, WilliamIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/02/2025
PF GH SNF Ops, LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/23/2021
PF GH SNF Ops, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/02/2025
Pharmerica Drug Systems LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/27/2017
Preservation Freehold CompanyOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/23/2021
Price, LarryIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE06/01/1982
Rehab Pro LPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/23/2021
Sanctuary LTC, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/23/2021
Sharma, NeerajIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/01/2012
Stonegate Senior Living, LPOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/22/2022

Showing 20 of 23 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 3 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Stonegate Senior Living — 24 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 23 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.

  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
  • "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
  • "How is routine foot care handled here, and does a podiatrist visit regularly?"
  • "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
  • "Who on your staff manages IV therapy, and what training and monitoring is in place?"
  • "Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 31% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 23 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 76 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Wylie Oaks Healthcare and Rehabilitation4.1 miWylie, TX★★☆☆☆2/5
Collinwood Nursing and Rehabilitation4.8 miPlano, TX★★☆☆☆2/5
San Remo4.8 miRichardson, TX★★☆☆☆2/5
Victoria Gardens of Allen5.7 miAllen, TX★★★★☆4/5
The Parks at Garland Healthcare and Rehab6.6 miGarland, TX★★★★☆4/5
The Park in Plano6.7 miPlano, TX★★★☆☆4/5
Pleasant Valley Healthcare and Rehabilitation Cent6.9 miGarland, TX★★☆☆☆2/5
Remington Transitional Care of Richardson7.0 miRichardson, TX★★★★☆4/5
The Belmont at Twin Creeks7.2 miAllen, TX★★★★☆3/5
Beltline Healthcare Center7.2 miGarland, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Legend Oaks Healthcare and Rehabilitation Garland7.4 miGarland, TX★★★☆☆3/5
Lindan Park Care Center LP7.7 miRichardson, TX★★★★☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Dallas, TX — 81 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 Wylie →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 676192.

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