TexasBryan

Legacy Nursing and Rehabilitation

2817 Kent Street, Bryan, TX 77802 · Brazos County · 117 certified beds · avg 100 residents/day · certified since Feb 7, 1969

Part of chain: LEGACY NURSING & REHABILITATION (9 facilities, chain avg rating 1.2★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$12,375
Fines, last 3 years
2.83
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jan 15, 2026 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Feb 9, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (39)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jul 2, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 5, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Feb 5, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · from a complaint
Jan 15, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Dec 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Dec 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
May 14, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 29, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Mar 29, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services.
Mar 29, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 7, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Jan 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems.
Jan 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jan 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Jan 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Jan 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs.
Jan 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician.
Jan 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 13).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023100E
202480F
2025170E
202641G ▲

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)

1 fine totaling $12,375.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jan 15, 2026Fine$12,375

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

MeasureThis facilityTexas avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)2.833.463.95bottom 13% in Texas; bottom 9% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.220.440.69bottom 10% in Texas; bottom 3% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.423.043.50bottom 11% in Texas; bottom 7% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.110.340.48bottom 3% in Texas; bottom 2% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)46.855.345.8top 37% in Texas; bottom 45% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)60.054.642.9bottom 42% in Texas; bottom 22% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.00, RN 0.23, weekend 2.56. Staffing rating: 1/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Anson Hospital DistrictOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest09/01/2025
Bryan Propco, L.L.C.OrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
VDG LLCOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Anson Hospital DistrictOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Bryan Opco LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Bryan Opco LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Bryan Propco, L.L.C.OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/24/2025
Clark, JustaIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Clark, JustaIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Dgprejean, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Dymock, MathewIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/03/2025
Dymock, MathewIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Gum, VictorIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Gum, VictorIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Haynes, BillieIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2016
Haynes, BillieIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Holyfield, MylesIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Jdgum, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Klein, PeteIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
LP Holdings, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Crestview Retirement Community0.5 miBryan, TX★★★★★5/5
Avir at Bryan0.5 miBryan, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5
Lampstand Nursing and Rehabilitation0.7 miBryan, TX★☆☆☆☆2/5
Five Points Nursing & Rehabilitation of College St5.0 miCollege Station, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Fortress Nursing and Rehabilitation5.9 miCollege Station, TX★★☆☆☆3/5
Accel at College Station6.4 miCollege Station, TX★★☆☆☆1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Bryan →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 455351.