FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Families researching Focused Care at Lamesa should be aware that it has a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's care quality. Ranked #461 out of 1168 nursing homes in Texas, it falls in the top half but still faces serious issues. The trend shows improvement, with the number of reported problems decreasing from 7 in 2024 to 4 in 2025, but it still has high staffing turnover at 59%, which is average for the state. Recent inspections revealed critical incidents, including one where a resident was forced to clean their own excrement, indicating severe neglect and a failure to ensure a safe environment. While the facility boasts excellent quality measures, the overall trust score and critical findings highlight substantial weaknesses that families need to consider.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Texas
- #461/1168
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 59% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $10,692 in fines. Lower than most Texas facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 15 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Texas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Texas average (2.8)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
13pts above Texas avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
11 points above Texas average of 48%
The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record
May 2025
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents had the right to formulate an advance directi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the resident's environment remained as fre...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and co...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide information to resident's and their representatives on their rights related to filing grievances or concerns for 16 o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to p...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to, in accordance with State and Federal laws, store al...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to meet the highest...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to prov...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure, before a resident was transferred to a hospital or the resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitche...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation , interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition in 1 of 1 kitchen, in that:
The f...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
2 deficiencies
2 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from verbal, sexual physica...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, ne...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities, both facility-sponsored group and individual ac...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to consult the physician and notify the resident representative when ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 15 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $10,692 in fines. Above average for Texas. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade F (34/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Focused Care At Lamesa's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Texas, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Focused Care At Lamesa Staffed?
CMS rates FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 59%, which is 13 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at Focused Care At Lamesa?
State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA during 2022 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 13 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Focused Care At Lamesa?
FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by FOCUSED POST ACUTE CARE PARTNERS, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 80 certified beds and approximately 44 residents (about 55% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in LAMESA, Texas.
How Does Focused Care At Lamesa Compare to Other Texas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Texas, FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (59%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Focused Care At Lamesa?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Focused Care At Lamesa Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Texas. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Focused Care At Lamesa Stick Around?
Staff turnover at FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA is high. At 59%, the facility is 13 percentage points above the Texas average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Focused Care At Lamesa Ever Fined?
FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA has been fined $10,692 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Texas average of $33,186. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Focused Care At Lamesa on Any Federal Watch List?
FOCUSED CARE AT LAMESA is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.