Texas ›Fort Worth

Richland Hills Rehabilitation and Healthcare Cente

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

3109 Kings Ct, Fort Worth, TX 76118 (opens Google Maps) · Tarrant County · (817) 589-2431· 92 certified beds · avg 62 residents/day · certified since Sep 24, 1985 · 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★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 7, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Nov 21, 2023
$8,190
Fines, last 3 years
2.80
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)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Nov 21, 2023 · 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): 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: Nov 22, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 17, 2023 · 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): 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: Sep 8, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 36 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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

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

    The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. F-0584

  3. 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

View all 36 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
May 28, 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
May 7, 2026E · 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. · F-0584
May 7, 2026E · 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
May 7, 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. · F-0677
May 7, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. · F-0790
May 7, 2026D · 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. · F-0880
Dec 5, 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
Dec 5, 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
Dec 5, 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
Dec 5, 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
Feb 27, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0803
Feb 27, 2025F · 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. · F-0812
Feb 27, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Feb 27, 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
Feb 27, 2025E · 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
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · from a complaint · F-0622
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0688
Feb 27, 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. · F-0842
Feb 27, 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. · F-0880
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0919
Jul 10, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from being involuntarily separated — kept apart from other residents, kept out of their own room, or confined to their room. Isolating a resident this way is a form of mistreatment. · from a complaint · F-0603
May 17, 2024D · 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
May 17, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · from a complaint · F-0553
Jan 25, 2024E · 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
Jan 25, 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
Jan 25, 2024E · 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
Jan 25, 2024D · 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. · F-0584
Jan 25, 2024D · 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
Jan 25, 2024D · 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
Jan 25, 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. · F-0761
Jan 25, 2024B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851
Nov 21, 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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Aug 17, 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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Aug 17, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility employed staff who were not licensed, certified, or registered as required by state law. · from a complaint · F-0839

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 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: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2024
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 15
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
202332G ▲
2024120E
2025150F
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 →

1 fine totaling $8,190.

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
Nov 21, 2023Fine$8,190

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: 2.80
Texas average: 3.46
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.17
Texas average: 0.44
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.38
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)2.803.463.95bottom 12% in Texas; bottom 8% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.170.440.69bottom 4% in Texas; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.383.043.50bottom 10% in Texas; bottom 6% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.130.340.48bottom 6% in Texas; bottom 3% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)72.055.345.8bottom 17% in Texas; bottom 5% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)—54.642.9—

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 3.02, RN 0.18, weekend 2.57.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.02 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Richland Hills Rehabilitation and Healthcare Cente. 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
Eastland Memorial Hospital DistrictOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%04/01/2017
Abitoye, OlutoyinIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE04/09/2024
Abitoye, OlutoyinIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/09/2024
Abitoye, OlutoyinIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/09/2024
Burnam, SoonIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE12/17/2012
Caretrust GP LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/17/2012
Caretrust Reit INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/17/2012
Ctr Partnership LPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/17/2012
Ensign Services INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/29/2012
Fossil Creek Healthcare, INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2017
Fossil Creek Healthcare, INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/12/2025
Keetch, ChadIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2011
Kings Court Health Holdings LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/17/2012
Munoz, AmyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE12/17/2012
Munoz, AmyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/17/2012
Munoz, AmyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/17/2012
Taylor, StephenIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2025

All 17 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 is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
  • "How do residents get routine dental care, and what happens if someone has a dental emergency at night?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
  • "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 72% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 17 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 83 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Avir at Richland Hills0.5 miRichland Hills, TX★★★☆☆3/5
Glenview Wellness & Rehabilitation1.7 miNorth Richland Hills, TX★☆☆☆☆2/5
Life Care Center of Haltom2.0 miFort Worth, TX★★★☆☆3/5
Avir at Emerald Hills3.1 miNorth Richland Hills, TX★★☆☆☆2/5
North Pointe Nursing and Rehabilitation4.0 miWatauga, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5
Hurst Plaza Nursing and Rehab4.3 miHurst, TX★★★★★5/5
Green Valley Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center4.5 miFort Worth, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5
Park View Care Center5.0 miFort Worth, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5
Oakmont Guest Care Center5.3 miHurst, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5
Bedford Wellness & Rehabilitation5.8 miBedford, TX★★★☆☆3/5
Interlochen Health and Rehabilitation Center6.3 miArlington, TX★☆☆☆☆2/5
La Dora Nursing and Rehabilitation Center6.3 miBedford, TX★★★★★5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Tarrant, TX — 71 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 Fort Worth →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 455576.

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