Texas ›El Campo

Paradigm at the Prairies

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

106 Del Norte Dr., El Campo, TX 77437 (opens Google Maps) · Wharton County · (979) 543-6762· 150 certified beds · avg 101 residents/day · certified since Sep 15, 2004 · 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 →

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

What the abuse flag means →

Part of chain: PARADIGM HEALTHCARE (17 facilities, chain avg rating 1.9★)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 16, 2025
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 15, 2026
$62,430
Fines, last 3 years
2.36
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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Mar 15, 2026 · 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: Apr 13, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Mar 15, 2026 · 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 (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: Apr 13, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Dec 16, 2023 · 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: Dec 24, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 27, 2025 · 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 (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: Jul 25, 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 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

  2. 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

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

    The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint F-0921

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
Jun 2, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0677
Jun 2, 2026D · 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
Jun 2, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921
Apr 20, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · from a complaint · F-0561
Apr 20, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint · F-0628
Apr 20, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0725
Mar 15, 2026▲ 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
Mar 15, 2026▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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
Nov 18, 2025E · 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. · from a complaint · F-0558
Nov 18, 2025E · 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Nov 18, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint · F-0919
Nov 18, 2025D · 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
Nov 18, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583
Nov 18, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Nov 18, 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. · from a complaint · F-0693
Nov 18, 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
Nov 18, 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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Aug 30, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility has more than 120 beds but did not hire a qualified full-time social worker as required. · from a complaint · F-0850
Jun 27, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, 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
Apr 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 16, 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
Feb 29, 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. · F-0690
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · from a complaint · F-0814
Feb 29, 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
Jan 26, 2024C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · from a complaint · F-0577
Dec 16, 2023▲ 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
Jan 12, 2023E · 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. · F-0812
Jan 12, 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 1).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 2

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202331J ▲
202440D
2025131G ▲
202682J ▲

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 →

3 fines totaling $62,430, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

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
Mar 15, 2026Fine$25,280
Mar 15, 2026Payment Denial8 days from Apr 14, 2026
Jun 27, 2025Fine$23,753
Dec 16, 2023Fine$13,397

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: 2.36
Texas average: 3.46
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.39
Texas average: 0.44
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.00
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)2.363.463.95bottom 1% in Texas; bottom 2% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.390.440.69top 50% in Texas; bottom 20% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.003.043.50bottom 1% in Texas; bottom 2% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.230.340.48bottom 32% in Texas; bottom 18% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)51.455.345.8top 48% in Texas; bottom 33% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)0.054.642.9top 1% in Texas; top 1% 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 2.42, RN 0.40, weekend 2.06.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.42 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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Paradigm at the Prairies. 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 - Individual

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Oakbend Medical CenterOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%01/01/2024
El Campo Nursing & Rehabilitation LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Freudenberger, JosephIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Shkop, AharonIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024

All 4 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 Paradigm Healthcare — 17 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 16 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 specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
  • "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
  • "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"

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 51% 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 (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
S.P.J.S.T. Rest Home 35.8 miEl Campo, TX★★★★★5/5
Paradigm at the Creek12.8 miWharton, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Wharton Nursing and Rehabilitation Center14.1 miWharton, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5
Ganado Nursing and Rehabilitation Center18.3 miGanado, TX★★☆☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in El Campo →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 676040.

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