TexasTexas City

The Lakes at Texas City

424 N Tarpey Rd, Texas City, TX 77591 · Galveston County · 109 certified beds · avg 70 residents/day · certified since Sep 12, 1984

Part of chain: HAMILTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT (10 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$8,410
Fines, last 3 years
3.08
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

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)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Nov 24, 2025 · 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 (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.

All citations in the current public record (29)

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
Dec 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services.
Dec 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Dec 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Dec 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's bedrooms did not give residents visual privacy — such as curtains or dividers — when privacy is needed.
Dec 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Dec 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 24, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Nov 26, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Sep 11, 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.
Sep 11, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Sep 11, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require.
Sep 11, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care.
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 5, 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. · from a complaint
Jun 5, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint
Jun 5, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Aug 4, 2023F · 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.
Aug 4, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 4, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that.
Aug 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Aug 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services.
Aug 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Aug 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Aug 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (5 → 8).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023110F
202490F
202591J ▲

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)

1 fine totaling $8,410.

DateTypeAmount / length
Nov 24, 2025Fine$8,410

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)3.083.463.95bottom 29% in Texas; bottom 17% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.430.440.69top 40% in Texas; bottom 26% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.703.043.50bottom 30% in Texas; bottom 16% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.280.340.48bottom 45% in Texas; bottom 27% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)62.055.345.8bottom 30% in Texas; bottom 14% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)58.354.642.9bottom 43% in Texas; bottom 24% in the U.S.

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 2.86, RN 0.40, weekend 2.50. Staffing rating: 1/5.

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

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Bay Oaks HC LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/29/2024
Hooper, GradyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/29/2024
Scheiner, EliezerIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/29/2024
Silberstein, AriIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/29/2024

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
Bayou Pines Care Center0.8 miLa Marque, TX★★☆☆☆3/5
The Shoal1.1 miTexas City, TX★★★★★5/5
Seabreeze Nursing and Rehabilitation1.3 miTexas City, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Harbor Point Skilled Nursing4.6 miTexas City, TX★★★★☆5/5
The Phoenix Post-Acute6.3 miTexas City, TX★★★☆☆3/5
The Heights of League City8.3 miLeague City, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5
Baywind Village Skilled Nursing & Rehab10.3 miLeague City, TX★★★★★5/5
MRC the Crossings10.4 miLeague City, TX★★★★★5/5
Regency Village12.2 miWebster, TX★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Galveston Nursing and Rehabilitation Center12.4 miGalveston, TX★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Focused Care at Webster13.0 miWebster, TX★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Laurel Court13.8 miAlvin, TX★★★★★5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Texas City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 455490.