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: PRIORITY MANAGEMENT (38 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 29, 2025
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Feb 25, 2025
$23,546
Fines, last 3 years
3.25
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 25, 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): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Feb 22, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Oct 23, 2024 · F-0604 · triggered by a complaint
The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
Why it matters: Unneeded restraints can cause injuries, muscle loss, and deep emotional distress.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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 9, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 15 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaintF-0558
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. · from a complaintF-0761
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 15 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
Jan 14, 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. · from a complaint · F-0558
Dec 8, 2025
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. · from a complaint · F-0761
May 29, 2025
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
May 29, 2025
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
Feb 25, 2025
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Oct 23, 2024
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint · F-0604
Jun 13, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Apr 18, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Apr 18, 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
Apr 18, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925
Mar 22, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · from a complaint · F-0558
Dec 16, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · from a complaint · F-0687
Dec 16, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals. · from a complaint · F-0810
Mar 2, 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
Mar 2, 2023
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. · F-0656
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 2).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
6
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2025
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2026
All citations:
1
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
4
0
E
2024
6
1
J ▲
2025
4
1
J ▲
2026
1
0
D
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.
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
Feb 25, 2025
Fine
$9,113
Oct 23, 2024
Fine
$14,433
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
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:
3.25
Texas average:
3.46
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.41
Texas average:
0.44
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
2.80
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)
3.25
3.46
3.95
bottom 44% in Texas; bottom 24% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.41
0.44
0.69
top 46% in Texas; bottom 23% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
2.80
3.04
3.50
bottom 39% in Texas; bottom 21% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.32
0.34
0.48
top 42% in Texas; bottom 36% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
46.3
55.3
45.8
top 36% in Texas; bottom 46% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
20.0
54.6
42.9
top 6% in Texas; top 13% 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 3.32, RN 0.41, weekend 2.86.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.32 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Victoria Gardens of Frisco. 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.
Showing 20 of 35 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 15 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Priority Management — 38 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.
CMS records place this facility in Collin, TX — 22 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Health inspection rating 4/5 · CMS overall 4/5· Fines (3y): $23,546
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Feb 25, 2025 (F-0689, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Oct 23, 2024 (F-0604, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
☐ "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
☐ "How do you handle residents who need modified food textures, and how do you make those meals appetizing?"
☐ "How is pest control handled here, and when was the last treatment or inspection?"
☐ "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 46% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "The ownership record on file lists 35 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 675811 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)