How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Mi Casita Nursing and Rehabilitation
2400 Quaker Ave, Lubbock, TX 79410 (opens Google Maps) · Lubbock County · (806) 792-2831· 95 certified beds · avg 51 residents/day · certified since Aug 24, 2000 · 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: GULF COAST LTC PARTNERS (20 facilities, chain avg rating 2.4★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 27, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.16
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 28 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The 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. F-0656
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. F-0689
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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 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 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0656 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | 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. · F-0689 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · F-0585 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. · F-0800 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 | 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 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Jan 8, 2025 | 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. · F-0689 |
| 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 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 |
| 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 |
| Jul 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Mar 12, 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 |
| Feb 10, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Nov 29, 2023 | 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 |
| Nov 29, 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 |
| Nov 29, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Nov 29, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Nov 29, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (10 → 10).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 5 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 10 | 0 | D |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityTexas averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.16
Texas average: 3.46
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.21
Texas average: 0.44
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.79
Texas average: 3.04
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 3.16 | 3.46 | 3.95 | bottom 35% in Texas; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.21 | 0.44 | 0.69 | bottom 10% in Texas; bottom 3% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.79 | 3.04 | 3.50 | bottom 39% in Texas; bottom 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.19 | 0.34 | 0.48 | bottom 17% in Texas; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 37.5 | 55.3 | 45.8 | top 15% in Texas; top 30% in the U.S. |
| 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 2.80, RN 0.19, weekend 2.48.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.80 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Mi Casita Nursing 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 - Partnership
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hansford County Hospital District | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 04/01/2018 |
| Bailey, Jonathan | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2010 |
| Bergeron, Bobby | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Lubb-Tex Properties, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Lubb-Tex Properties, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Mi Casita LTC Partners, INC. | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Mi Casita LTC Partners, INC. | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/26/2025 |
| Nicholson, Louis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Skinner, Derek | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2019 |
| Torres, Blanca | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/11/2018 |
All 10 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 Gulf Coast LTC Partners — 20 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.
- Oak Village Healthcare — Lake Jackson, TX · overall 4/5
- Palo Duro Nursing Home — Claude, TX · overall 3/5
- Panola County Nursing & Rehabilitation — Carthage, TX · overall 3/5
- Teague Nursing and Rehabilitation — Teague, TX · overall 5/5
- The Oaks at Longview — Longview, TX · overall 3/5
- Wells LTC Nursing & Rehabilitation — Wells, TX · overall 1/5abuseSFF
- Woodlake Nursing Center — Clute, TX · overall 3/5
- Woodland Park Nursing & Rehab — Shepherd, TX · overall 1/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 19 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "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?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
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 38% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 14 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mesquite Post Acute Care | 0.2 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Lakeside Rehabilitation and Care Center | 0.6 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lubbock Health Care Center | 0.6 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Southern Specialty Rehab & Nursing | 0.7 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Mildred & Shirley L. Garrison Geriatric Educat | 1.5 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Avir at Lubbock | 1.6 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Carillon INC | 1.7 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Whisperwood Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 1.8 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| The Plaza at Lubbock | 2.3 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Avir at Heritage Oaks | 2.9 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Hansford County Hospital District DBA Lakeridge Nu | 3.1 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Crown Point Health Suites | 3.6 mi | Lubbock, TX | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Lubbock, TX — 15 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Slaton Care Center — Slaton, TX · overall 4/5
- Windmill Village Rehabilitation & Care Center — Lubbock, TX · overall 4/5
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 675842.