TexasSterling City

Sterling Nursing and Rehab

309 Fifth St, Sterling City, TX 76951 · Sterling County · 44 certified beds · avg 22 residents/day · certified since Jun 18, 2001

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
6.18
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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 · Jun 22, 2023 · F-0689

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: Jul 14, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (13)

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
Sep 11, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Sep 11, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint
Sep 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Sep 11, 2025E · 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. · from a complaint
Aug 8, 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.
Aug 8, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Aug 8, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Aug 8, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 22, 2023▲ 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.
Jun 22, 2023F · 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.
Jun 22, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Jun 22, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 22, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's bedrooms did not give residents visual privacy — such as curtains or dividers — when privacy is needed.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (4 → 4).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202351G ▲
202440F
202540F

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)

0 fines totaling $0, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

DateTypeAmount / length
Aug 23, 2024Payment Denial27 days from Nov 23, 2024

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)6.183.463.95top 1% in Texas; top 3% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.480.440.69top 30% in Texas; bottom 34% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing5.013.043.50top 2% in Texas; top 6% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.420.340.48top 23% in Texas; top 45% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)53.355.345.8bottom 47% in Texas; bottom 29% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)0.054.642.9

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 5.35, RN 0.41, weekend 4.34. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

Government - County

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Sterling County Nursing HomeOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%07/20/2001
Counts, BelindaIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2024
Counts, BelindaIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2024
Fowler, JasonIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2020
Fowler, JasonIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2020
Hunt, JohnIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2020
Hunt, JohnIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2020

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
Robert Lee Care Center29.0 miRobert Lee, TX★★★★★5/5
Park Plaza Nursing and Rehabilitation Center38.8 miSan Angelo, TX★★★☆☆4/5
Cedar Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center39.1 miSan Angelo, TX★★★★☆4/5
Mitchell County Nursing and Rehabilitation Center39.2 miColorado City, TX★★★☆☆3/5
Regency House39.2 miSan Angelo, TX★★★☆☆4/5
Big Spring Center for Skilled Care39.5 miBig Spring, TX★★★☆☆4/5
Parkview Skilled Care and Rehabilitation39.8 miBig Spring, TX★★★★☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Sterling City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 675880.