ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing and Rehabilitation has a Trust Grade of C+, which means it is slightly above average but not outstanding. It ranks #302 out of 1168 facilities in Texas, placing it in the top half of nursing homes in the state, and #10 out of 22 in Hidalgo County, indicating that there are only a few local options that perform better. The facility's trend is stable, with eight issues reported in both 2024 and 2025, meaning there has not been a noticeable improvement or decline in its performance. Staffing is a concern, with a poor rating of 1 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 20%, which is better than the Texas average, suggesting some staff stability but still not ideal. However, it has received fines totaling $8,021, which is average compared to other facilities, and the RN coverage is average as well, meaning it meets basic standards but may not provide exceptional oversight. Some specific incidents noted in inspections include a critical failure to ensure a resident with a wandering risk was adequately supervised, resulting in the resident eloping from the facility twice. Additionally, there were concerns about the Activity Director not being certified and a lack of informed consent from residents for psychotropic medications, which could put residents at risk. Overall, while there are some strengths, such as its decent Trust Grade and stable performance, there are significant weaknesses regarding staffing and compliance that families should carefully consider.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Texas
- #302/1168
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Holding Steady
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 20% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 28 points below Texas's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $8,021 in fines. Lower than most Texas facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 20 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Texas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 21 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (20%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (20%)
28 points below Texas average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 21 deficiencies on record
May 2025
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
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 develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that i...
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 each resident received adequate supervisi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
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 use the services of a registered nurse for at least 8 consecutive h...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary drugs f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
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 maintain clinical records on each resident that were complete and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0680
(Tag F0680)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the activities program was directed by a qualified profession...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2025
2 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
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the a...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with accepted professional standards and pract...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
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 a resident who needs respiratory care was...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Resident #38
FTag Initiation
03/29/24 09:42 AM
Care Plan:
• I receive antidepressant medication (Zoloft) r/t s/s of major depressive disorder- anxietyH
•I will be free from discomfort or a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
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 each resident's drug regimen was free from unnec...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Observation and interview revealed the facility failed to provide a safe and functional environment for residents, staff, and the public in 1 of 4 resident rooms, and in 1 of 1 patio smoking area, obs...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0552
(Tag F0552)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to inform residents in advance of the risks and benefits of proposed ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and co...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
1 deficiency
1 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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · 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 ensure each resident recieved adequate supervision ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2023
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records in accordance with accepted professional s...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
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
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 each resident received adequate supervisi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
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 develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 ki...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS) was electronically completed and tr...
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?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 20% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 28 points below Texas's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 21 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
About This Facility
What is Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Texas, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation Staffed?
CMS rates ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 20%, compared to the Texas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation?
State health inspectors documented 21 deficiencies at ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 19 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation?
ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility is operated by WELLSENTIAL HEALTH, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 69 residents (about 57% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in WESLACO, Texas.
How Does Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation Compare to Other Texas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Texas, ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (20%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation?
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?" "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?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 4-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 Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation Stick Around?
Staff at ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 20%, the facility is 26 percentage points below the Texas average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly.
Was Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation Ever Fined?
ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION has been fined $8,021 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Texas average of $33,159. 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 Orchard Park Post Acute Nursing And Rehabilitation on Any Federal Watch List?
ORCHARD PARK POST ACUTE NURSING AND REHABILITATION 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.