309 Fifth St, Sterling City, TX 76951 (opens Google Maps) · Sterling County · (325) 378-2134· 44 certified beds · avg 22 residents/day · certified since Jun 18, 2001 · 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 →
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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 14, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 13 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint F-0908
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. · from a complaint F-0695
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 11, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Sep 11, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint · F-0908 |
| Sep 11, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0695 |
| Sep 11, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 · F-0805 |
| Aug 8, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 8, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Aug 8, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jun 22, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Jun 22, 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 |
| Jun 22, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Jun 22, 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 |
| Jun 22, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's bedrooms did not give residents visual privacy — such as curtains or dividers — when privacy is needed. · F-0914 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (4 → 4).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 5 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 4 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 4 | 0 | F |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
0 fines totaling $0, 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.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 23, 2024 | Payment Denial | 27 days from Nov 23, 2024 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 6.18 | 3.46 | 3.95 | top 1% in Texas; top 3% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.48 | 0.44 | 0.69 | top 30% in Texas; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.01 | 3.04 | 3.50 | top 2% in Texas; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.42 | 0.34 | 0.48 | top 23% in Texas; top 45% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 53.3 | 55.3 | 45.8 | bottom 47% in Texas; bottom 29% 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 5.35, RN 0.41, weekend 4.34.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.35 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Sterling Nursing and Rehab. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 →
Government - County
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sterling County Nursing Home | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 07/20/2001 |
| Counts, Belinda | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2024 |
| Counts, Belinda | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2024 |
| Fowler, Jason | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2020 |
| Fowler, Jason | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2020 |
| Hunt, John | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2020 |
| Hunt, John | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2020 |
All 7 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robert Lee Care Center | 29.0 mi | Robert Lee, TX | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Park Plaza Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 38.8 mi | San Angelo, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Cedar Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 39.1 mi | San Angelo, TX | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Mitchell County Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 39.2 mi | Colorado City, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Regency House | 39.2 mi | San Angelo, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Big Spring Center for Skilled Care | 39.5 mi | Big Spring, TX | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Parkview Skilled Care and Rehabilitation | 39.8 mi | Big Spring, TX | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 675880.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details