Hearth Record

Dfw Home Health

A home health agency in Dallas, Texas 75240

13140 Coit Rd, Suite 450, Dallas, Texas 75240. (214) 891-8700.

CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.

The short answer

Record last released by CMS on Oct 21, 2026.

The last 24 months 2 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Apr 2026. Most serious: Element-level. Every month

Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.

What these words mean3
Star ratings
CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
Inspection (survey)
A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
Deficiency, citation, violation
What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.

What did inspectors find?

The last inspection on record was on Apr 28, 2026: a complaint inspection.

2 deficiencies cited in the last three years.

Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

When those deficiencies happened

2 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Apr 2026. Most serious: Element-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 24, 2026.

2 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 NovDec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOct

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.

Each deficiency, as cited

Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.

Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Apr 28, 2026: complaint inspection2 deficiencies
  • Immediate Reporting Of Abuse By All Staff

    The inspectors’ words, 728 words

    “Immediate reporting of abuse by all staff CFR(s): 484.50(e)(2) Any HHA staff (whether employed directly or under arrangements) in the normal course of providing services to patients, who identifies, notices, or recognizes incidences or circumstances of mistreatment, neglect, verbal, mental, sexual, and/or physical abuse, including injuries of unknown source, or misappropriation of patient property, must report these findings immediately to the HHA and other appropriate authorities in accordance with state law. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, when the agency had cause to believe an agency patient had been neglected by agency employees, the agency failed to report the information within 24 hours to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission in one of three records reviewed (Patient 1). This failure placed all patients at an increased risk of abuse, neglect, and exploitation by agency staff and delayed the investigations by the Texas Department of Health and Human Services. Findings included: During pre-survey preparation on 04/22/2026, a review was conducted of the Texas Unified Licensure Information Portal (a database utilized by the state to maintain licensing, demographic information, complaints and self-reported incidents on Home Health and for the State of Texas). Review of the agency information failed to include the agency had submitted a self-reported incident of alleged neglect of Client 1. Record review of agency complaint log on 04/27/2026: The complaint log included one complaint with allegations of neglect of Patient 1 dated 04/16/2026 and processed by the Adm/DON on 04/17/2026. The complaint log did not include the allegation of neglect was reported to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. The complaint log read in part, “…[Patient 1]… This nurse spoke with pt’s [Family Member]... who advised “when my father was in the hospital, they told us that they were going to send my [Patient 1] to anohter (sic) agency because when he was on service with you his wounds becames (sic) infected and his urine backed up inside of him because the bag wasn’t changed. They called APS and APS called me and siad (sic) that this is unacceptable… Prevention: discussed complaint & chart review with AA…” During an interview with the Adm/DON and the Area Adm on 04/29/2026 at 12:55 PM, the surveyor reviewed the complaint regarding Patient 1 received by the agency on 04/16/2026 and asked why the agency had not self-reported the allegation of neglect. The Adm/DON stated she did the follow-up for the complaint. The Area Adm stated Patient 1’s wound care clinic called the agency to let the agency know Patient 1 was changing to another home health agency. The agency attempted to gather facts by interviewing family members and obtaining medical records but were unsuccessful. The Area Adm stated without all of the facts, she didn’t think it was reportable and she was waiting to gather all of the facts to determine if it would be reported by the agency. The Area Adm stated that she wondered if agency nurses should have filed a report with Adult Protective Services [Department of Family and Protective Services]. The Adm/DON stated she agreed with the Area Adm’s answer. The surveyor asked who was responsible for self-reporting neglect and why agency policy had not been followed on self-reporting. The Area Adm stated she was responsible for reporting neglect, but she wanted the Adm/DON to be responsible in the future. The Area Adm stated she had dropped the ball on the allegations of neglect of Patient 1. The Adm/DON stated she agreed with the Area Adm’s answer. Agency policy titled, “PATIENT ABUSE, EXPLOITATION,AND NEGLECT: ASSESSMENT, IDENTIFICATION, AND REPORTING… 2.1.005T” with a last reviewed dated of 11/01/2024 read in part, “… This policy and procedure is applicable to ONLY Texas agencies… PURPOSE: To identify, assess and report victims of actual or suspected… neglect… Policy… If an agency has cause to believe that a patient served by the agency has been… neglected… by an agency employee, the agency must report the information immediately, within 24 hours to: The Health and Human Services Commission… Definitions… Neglect Failure to provide one’s self the goods or services, including medical services, which are necessary to avoid physical or emotional harm or pain or the failure of a caretaker to provide such goods or services… Reportable Conduct: Includes… neglect that causes or may cause death or harm to an individual receiving agency services…””

    Rule G0488. Element-level. From a complaint.

  • Plan Of Care Must Include The Following

    The inspectors’ words, 821 words

    “Plan of care must include the following CFR(s): 484.60(a)(2)(i-xvi) The individualized plan of care must include the following: (i) All pertinent diagnoses; (ii) The patient’s mental, psychosocial, and cognitive status; (iii) The types of services, supplies, and equipment required; (iv) The frequency and duration of visits to be made; (v) Prognosis; (vi) Rehabilitation potential; (vii) Functional limitations; (viii) Activities permitted; (ix) Nutritional requirements; (x) All medications and treatments; (xi) Safety measures to protect against injury; (xii) A description of the patient’s risk for emergency department visits and hospital re-admission, and all necessary interventions to address the underlying risk factors. (xiii) Patient and caregiver education and training to facilitate timely discharge; (xiv) Patient-specific interventions and education; measurable outcomes and goals identified by the HHA and the patient; (xv) Information related to any advanced directives; and (xvi) Any additional items the HHA or physician or allowed practitioner may choose to include. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure a plan of care included all pertinent diagnoses and patient-specific interventions in one of three records reviewed (Patient 1) in that the plan of care did not include wound care orders for a bedsore (pressure ulcer/decubitus ulcer) on the right bottom (buttock); a diagnoses for paraplegia (unable to move legs and lower body), colostomy (surgery to create an opening for the colon/large intestine through the belly), and urinary catheter (tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) ; and orders for the nurse to assess the colostomy site for infection. These failures placed the patient in jeopardy of harm from agency staff who could not address the types of services needed for appropriate care and placed them at risk of a declining health status and complications. Findings included: Patient 1: Record review of the medical record included a plan of care dated 03/10/2026 to 05/08/2026 with a start of care date of 03/10/2026 that was signed and dated by RN A on 03/09/2026 (the day before the start of care). The physician ordered the nurse to visit the patient three times a week for six weeks, then two times a week for one week, then three times a week for two weeks. The plan of care included a diagnosis of a bedsore on the sacral (sometimes referred to as the coccyx: region of the back at the bottom of the spine) and a bedsore on the right bottom. The plan of care included wound care orders for the bedsore on the sacral area. The record included a start of care visit note signed and dated by RN A on 03/10/2026 that read in part, “… how many times has the patient urinated in the past 24 hours? Patient has an indwelling catheter… Does the patient have a colostomy… Yes… Indicate other musculoskeletal (both muscles and bones) finding… Paraplegic…” The plan of care did not include wound care orders for the bedsore on the right bottom; a diagnosis for paraplegia, colostomy, and urinary catheter; and orders for the nurse to assess the colostomy site for infection. During an interview by Surveyor 1 with RN A on 04/27/2026 at 1:28 PM, the surveyor asked why the plan of care did not include wound care orders for the bedsore on the right bottom; a diagnosis for paraplegia, colostomy, and urinary catheter; and orders for the nurse to assess the colostomy site for infection. RN A stated the wound care orders included in the plan of care for the coccyx/sacral area were the same wound care orders for the wound on the bottom. RN A stated it was an oversight that the items were not included in the plan of care. During an interview by Surveyor 1 with the Adm/DON and Area Adm on 04/28/2026 at 12:45 PM, the surveyor asked why the plan of care did not include wound care orders for the bedsore on the right bottom; a diagnosis for paraplegia, colostomy, and urinary catheter; and orders for the nurse to assess the colostomy site for infection. The Area Adm stated that was a great question. The Adm/DON stated the RN’s who signed the plan of care enters the information onto the plan of care while in the field [patient home] and then the plan of cares are reviewed by different departments in the office. Surveyor 1 asked why agency policy was not followed. The Area Adm stated the staff needed education to make sure everything was included in the plan of cares as required. The Adm/DON stated they needed to focus on the whole patient and not just the patient’s primary problem when the plan of care were developed. Agency policy titled, “Plan of Care… 2.1.007” with a last reviewed date of 03/01/2026 read in part, “… PURPOSE: To assure an appropriate plan of care is developed and revised in a timely manner for each patient… PROCEDURE…The POC includes… Pertinent diagnosis(es)… Patient specific interventions...””

    Rule G0574. Element-level. From a complaint.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Apr 28, 2026Complaint inspection2 deficiencies cited
Sep 25, 2025Recertification inspectionNo deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified home health agency since Jul 3, 1995.
  • Ownership: proprietary (for profit).
  • No deficiency on record in the last three years.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Has anything been proven against it?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for home health agencies, so none are shown.
  • 2 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Who does the caring?

  • Offers nursing care, physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech pathology, medical social services and home health aide services.
  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for home health agencies.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who owns it?

  • Texas Health Care Group, LLC owns 70% directly since Jul 1, 2012; Texas Health Resources owns 20% directly since Jul 1, 2012; North Texas Health Facilities Management Inc. owns 10% directly since Jul 1, 2012.
  • LHC Group Inc. runs it.
  • 4 owners or officers are people: Joni Babineaux (corporate officer, 0%); Megan Evans (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Joshua Lee Proffitt (corporate officer); Amy Cormier (corporate director, 0%).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Agency All Owners and Home Health Agency Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Unitedhealth Group IncorporatedOwns 5% or more through other companies70%Feb 22, 2023
Texas Health Care Group, LLCOwns 5% or more directly70%Jul 1, 2012
LHC Group Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies70%Jul 1, 2012
Texas Health ResourcesOwns 5% or more directly20%Jul 1, 2012
North Texas Health Facilities Management Inc.Owns 5% or more directly10%Jul 1, 2012
LHC Group Inc.Runs it (operational or managerial control)Jul 1, 2012

How do patients fare?

  • CMS rates its quality of patient care 3 of 5.
  • Patients rate it 3 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (254 surveys completed): 82% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 71% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS compares it with the national rate: discharged to the community, better; potentially preventable hospital stays, the same; potentially preventable readmissions after discharge, the same.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies and Home Health Patient Survey. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Quality of patient care ratingCMS star rating, 1 to 5 in half stars3 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the agency’s patients, 1 to 53 of 5
Discharged to the communityCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate86.90% (better than the national rate)
Potentially preventable hospital staysCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate9.46% (same as the national rate)
Potentially preventable readmissions after dischargeCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate4.04% (same as the national rate)

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 123 agencies CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 75240, where this agency’s office is, 98 have a quality of patient care rating; the middle one is 3 of 5, and this one is rated 3 of 5.
Source:

CMS, Home Health ZIP Codes and Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for home health agencies, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • QCOR says some of its home health reports are accurate or available only through May 19, 2021, because of a systems migration.
  • Many home health agencies are inspected by a private accrediting organisation instead of the state, and QCOR’s home health file doesn’t appear to include those inspections: no inspection on record here doesn’t mean none took place.

Sources

If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Oct 24, 2026.

From the agency

The public record above comes first. Anything the agency adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the agency will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.

Paid listing

None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the agency”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 28, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.