How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
San Remo
3550 N Shiloh Rd, Richardson, TX 75082 (opens Google Maps) · Dallas County · (972) 231-4810· 112 certified beds · avg 96 residents/day · certified since Jun 30, 2010 · 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: CANTEX CONTINUING CARE (37 facilities, chain avg rating 3.1★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 19, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.35
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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 31 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0812
The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. F-0583
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint F-0584
View all 31 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | 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 |
| Feb 19, 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. · from a complaint · F-0550 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0655 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 19, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Feb 19, 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 |
| Feb 19, 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 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | 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. · F-0755 |
| Feb 19, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Dec 5, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Dec 5, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to share a room with their spouse or a roommate of their choosing, or moved residents to a different room without written notice beforehand. · F-0559 |
| Dec 5, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0644 |
| Dec 5, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 5, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Mar 11, 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 |
| Jan 30, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jan 30, 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 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | 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 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | 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 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (5 → 19).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 20
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 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 20 | 0 | E |
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: 3.35
Texas average: 3.46
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.61
Texas average: 0.44
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.14
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) | 3.35 | 3.46 | 3.95 | top 48% in Texas; bottom 29% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.61 | 0.44 | 0.69 | top 15% in Texas; top 46% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.14 | 3.04 | 3.50 | top 32% in Texas; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.59 | 0.34 | 0.48 | top 8% in Texas; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 46.8 | 55.3 | 45.8 | top 37% in Texas; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 33.3 | 54.6 | 42.9 | top 20% in Texas; top 33% 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 3.62, RN 0.66, weekend 3.39.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.62 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: 5/5 · 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 San Remo. 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 / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dallas County Hospital District | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 09/01/2019 |
| Castaneda, Edmundo | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/10/2022 |
| Cerise, Frederick | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/24/2014 |
| Lone, Jamal | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Martin, Murry | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/17/2023 |
| Martin, Murry | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/17/2023 |
| Runyan, Carmen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/03/2020 |
| Sr Senior Community LTD. Co | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2019 |
| Sr Senior Community LTD. Co | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2019 |
All 9 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 Cantex Continuing Care — 37 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.
- Solera at West Houston — Houston, TX · overall 3/5
- Sorrento — San Antonio, TX · overall 2/5
- Sundance Inn Health Center — New Braunfels, TX · overall 2/5abuse
- The Belmont at Twin Creeks — Allen, TX · overall 4/5
- The Bradford at Brookside — Livingston, TX · overall 3/5
- The Broadmoor at Creekside Park — The Woodlands, TX · overall 3/5
- The Carlyle at Stonebridge Park — Southlake, TX · overall 1/5
- The Colonnades at Reflection Bay — Pearland, TX · overall 1/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 36 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.
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "How do you decide when a feeding tube is truly needed, and how do staff care for residents who have one?"
- "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
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 47% 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 84 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collinwood Nursing and Rehabilitation | 1.3 mi | Plano, TX | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Remington Transitional Care of Richardson | 2.2 mi | Richardson, TX | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Lindan Park Care Center LP | 3.0 mi | Richardson, TX | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Parks at Garland Healthcare and Rehab | 3.3 mi | Garland, TX | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Legend Oaks Healthcare and Rehabilitation Garland | 3.6 mi | Garland, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Park in Plano | 3.9 mi | Plano, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| The Reserve at Richardson | 4.0 mi | Richardson, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Plaza at Richardson | 4.2 mi | Richardson, TX | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Richardson Nursing and Rehabilitation | 4.8 mi | Richardson, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Garnet Hill Rehabilitation and Skilled Care | 4.8 mi | Wylie, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Beltline Healthcare Center | 4.8 mi | Garland, TX | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| The Healthcare Resort of Plano | 5.3 mi | Plano, 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.
- Sandy Lake Rehabilitation and Care Center — Coppell, TX · overall 2/5
- Signature Pointe — Dallas, TX · overall 2/5
- Simpson Place — Dallas, TX · overall 2/5
- Skyline Nursing Center — Dallas, TX · overall 2/5abuse
- South Dallas Nursing & Rehabilitation — Dallas, TX · overall 1/5
- Southern Oaks Therapy and Living Center — Dallas, TX · overall 3/5
- The Highlands Guest Care Center — Dallas, TX · overall 1/5
- The Hillcrest of North Dallas — Dallas, TX · overall 1/5
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 676256.