Hearth Record

Acara

A hospice in San Antonio, Texas 78229

9514 Console Dr Suite 200, San Antonio, Texas 78229. (210) 366-1125.

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 23, 2026.

The last 24 months 27 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Dec 2024. Most serious: Condition-level. Every month

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

What these words mean3
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.
Condition-level deficiency
For hospices, home health agencies, hospitals and dialysis facilities, CMS writes deficiencies at two levels. Standard is the usual one; condition-level is the more serious, when a problem is serious enough that the provider doesn’t meet a whole condition of taking part in Medicare. Source: CMS, State Operations Manual.

What did inspectors find?

27 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 101 hospices serving ZIP code 78229 had 4.

The last inspection on record was on Jan 24, 2025: a follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission.

4 deficiencies at condition level, the more serious of CMS’s two levels

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

When those deficiencies happened

27 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Dec 2024. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

27 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 hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Dec 27, 2024: follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission5 deficiencies
  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(4))

    The inspectors’ words, 147 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 5 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the plan of care include all services needed for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions. For example: on review of HosRRHV#1 the patient was ordered morphine sulfate (concentrate) oral solution 20mg/ml 0.25 ml - 1ml every 2-4 hours as needed, and an order for Lorazepam 0.5 mg 1-2 tabs every 4 hours, however there was no specific instructions to guide the patient/caregiver for when to give which dose for what situation. Morphine with a range of 0.25 to 1ml without specific instructions can also be seen in HosRRNHV#3, along with a range for liquid Hydrocodone without specific instructions. HosRRNHV#4 the documentation noted the patient with bilateral heel wounds yet no wound care treatment orders noted on the record. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0549. Condition-level.

  • Governing body and administrator (42 CFR 418.100(b))

    “Observed in Record Review. Upon review of all tracer activities, it was noted that there was a pattern of staff failing to follow established organization policy and the governing body/leadership did not ensure that the Conditions of Participation for 418.56, were met per policy as determined through observations, documentation, and staff interviews. 

”

    Rule L0651. Condition-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(5))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 5 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to conduct and document a patient-specific comprehensive assessment and reassessment that identifies the patient’s need for hospice care and services. On review of HosRRNHV#4 there was documentation of unstageable wounds to bilateral heels yet there was no documentation noted in the record of an ongoing comprehensive wound assessment as required to include wound description such as size, color, drainage, odor, surrounding skin. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0529. Standard-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(7))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 5 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to conducts and documents a patient-specific comprehensive assessment and reassessment that identifies the patient’s need for hospice care and services to include an initial bereavement risk assessment. On review of HosRRNHV#1 there was no documentation that an initial bereavement risk assessment had been completed. This observation was reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0531. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 5 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the plan of care reflect patient and family goals that were individualized, specific, measurable, and time bound. For example: on review of RRNHV#1 there were goals that were no specific and measurable such as Patients pain will remain at a level of comfort. and Patient will have decreased reports of falls. The same non-specific, not measurable goals were noted on RRNHV#4, and RRNHV#5. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

Nov 15, 2024: reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission22 deficiencies
  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(5))

    The inspectors’ words, 196 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 10 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to conducts and documents a patient-specific comprehensive assessment and reassessment that identifies the patient’s need for hospice care and services to include the need for volunteer services to offer support or respite to the patient, family, or other caregivers. Throughout all active records reviewed there was no documentation that the need for volunteer services was assessed as part of the comprehensive assessments. This observation was reviewed with the Hospice Director. Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to conduct and document a patient-specific comprehensive assessment and reassessment that identifies the patient’s need for hospice care and services. On review of HosRRHV#1 there was documentation of wounds to the sacrum/coccyx and ear yet there was no documentation noted in the record of an ongoing comprehensive wound assessment as required to include wound description such as size, color, drainage, odor, surrounding skin. In review of HosRRNHV#9 there was documentation of a buttocks or sacral wound in the record yet there was no documentation that a wound assessment was conducted. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0529. Condition-level.

  • Governing body and administrator (42 CFR 418.100(b))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. Upon review of all tracer activities, it was noted that there was a pattern of staff failing to follow established organization policy and the governing body/leadership did not ensure that the Conditions of Participation for 418.100, 418.54, 418.56, and418.78 were met per policy as determined through observations, documentation, and staff interviews. 

”

    Rule L0651. Condition-level.

  • EP Training Program (42 CFR 418.113(d)(1)(iii))

    “Observed in Emergency Management Session. The organization failed to provide ongoing education and training to all staff consistent with their roles and responsibilities in an emergency. During emergency management session, the Hospice Director was unable to provide documentation that their staff had been trained on the role and responsibility in the event of an emergency.”

    Rule E0037. Standard-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(7))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 10 patient records reviewed, The organization failed to ensure the initial bereavement assessment was conducted as part of the initial comprehensive assessment. On review of HosRRHV#3 the initial bereavement risk assessment was not documented as conducted until a month after the start of care date. In HosRRNHV#10 there was no documentation that an initial bereavement risk assessment was completed on admission. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0531. Standard-level.

  • Update of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 165 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 10 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the update of the comprehensive assessment was accomplished by the hospice interdisciplinary group that included the patient’s progress toward goals. Throughout all records reviewed there was a noted lack of documentation of progress toward goals. There was documentation that interventions such as assessments and education were completed on various visits yet no specific progress toward goals documented. This observation was reviewed with the Hospice Director. Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the update of the comprehensive assessment was accomplished by the hospice interdisciplinary group no less frequency that every 15 days. On review of HosRRNHV#4 and HosRRNHV#10 there was a 28 day gap between documented IDG meetings to update the comprehensive assessment between August and September. In HosRRNHV#7 there was a 28 day gap between IDG meetings between June and July. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0533. Standard-level.

  • Plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(b ))

    The inspectors’ words, 146 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 10 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the plan of care reflect patient and family goals that were individualized, specific, measurable, and time bound. Throughout records reviewed there was a pattern of goals that were not specific, measurable, and time-bound. For example: in HosRRHV#1 an example of a spiritual goals was simply Adjustment, others were caregiver/family will demonstrate understanding of neurological condition and decline - by the time of death/discharge. In HosRRHV#2 and example was Provide active and reflective listening and Pain Control as Patient’s Acceptable Level Within 48 Hours of Identification. In HosRRHV#3 an example was Edema will be decreased or managed for patient comfort. By death/discharge. In HosRRNHV#5 an example was patient will have regular bowel movements. Further examples can be found in all active records reviewed. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0543. Standard-level.

  • Plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(b))

    The inspectors’ words, 123 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the patient and/or primary care giver receive education and training provided by the hospice as appropriate to their responsibilities for the care and services identified in the plan of care. For example: on review of HosRRNHV#4 there was no order for an antihypertensive with instructions that indicated Hydralazine 50 mg take 1 tab by mouth in afternoon when BP is elevated. There was no documentation noted in the record that the family had been educated on how to properly obtain a blood pressure and the parameter for how and when to give the medication, its indications and side effects. This observation was reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0544. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 353 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 7 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the plan of care include all services needed for the palliation and management or the terminal illness and related conditions. For example: on review of HosRRHV#1 the patient was being seen by the MSW yet there was no psychosocial care plan established. There was documentation of medications for upper respiratory infection yet the care was not reflected in the plan of care. In HosRRHV#2 there was documentation that the MSW was working on meals on wheels for the patient yet the issue was not reflected in the plan of care. In HosRRHV#3 there was documentation the patient was admitted to the VA hospital with pneumonia and released on antibiotics yet the plan of care did not reflect the patient change is status, nor was a psychosocial care plan noted on the record. In HosRRNHV#4 there was documentation the patient was using a purewick urinary device but no care plan to guide its care. The MSW documented phone calls to assist the family with psychosocial issues but no care plan to reflect the issues. In HosRRNHV#5 the was documentation of a Left Calf rash with meds, and issues necessitating changes in BP meds yet the was no reflection of the issues in the care plans. In HosRRNHV#7 there was documentation the patient was receiving palliative chemotherapy yet no care plan to guide and collaborate the care. In HosRRNHV#8 there was documentation that the patient was symptomatic because of bottomed out blood pressure yet the plan of care did not reflect the issues. Throughout all active records reviewed there was a noted disconnect between the goals established and interventions to achieve the goals. Most interventions were for assessment. Such as in HosRRNHV#8 the goals for cardiac read Patient/PCG will participate in plan of care to ensure understanding of the dying process and feelings of being supported. yet the interventions to achieve the goals were to assess for signs/symptoms of fluid overload, blood clots, cardiac circulatory function, and assess BP and Pulse. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0546. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(4))

    The inspectors’ words, 217 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 7 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the plan of care include all services needed for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions. For example: on review of HosRRHV#1 the patient was ordered morphine sulfate (concentrate) oral solution 20mg/ml 0.25 ml - 1ml every 2 hours as needed, however there was no specific instructions to guide the patient/caregiver for when to give which dose for what situation. Morphine with a range of 0.25 to 1ml without specific instructions can also be seen in HosRRNHV#4, HosRRNHV#5, HosRRNHV#7 and HosRRNHV#10. In HosRRHV#1 there was an order for oxygen 2-4 lts PRN yet there was no indication of a route such as per nasal cannula, nor were there specific instruction to guide on which liter flow to choose. In HosRRNHV#7 the order for oxygen noted 2-10 liters per NC or Non Rebreather continuous as needed. An incomplete or absent oxygen order was also noted in HosRRNHV#5, and HosRRNHV#8. In review of HosRRHV#3 and HosRRNHV#7 the medication profile noted oxygen permeable lens products solution in place of oxygen for inhalation. In HosRRNHV#9 the documentation noted the patient with a wound yet not wound care treatment orders noted on the record. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0549. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 289 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 7 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the care and services were provided in accordance with the plan of care. On review of HosRRHV#2 the spiritual counselor and MSW was noted to be seeing the patient monthly through the second benefit period yet there were no orders for spiritual/psychosocial frequency noted on the plan of care (POC). The Aide was seeing the patient starting in June 2 times a week yet there was no frequency order noted on the plan of care until November. In HosRRHV#3 the MSW frequency per the plan of care was quarterly yet there were multiple social work visits documented each month. In HosRRNHV#4 early in the patient’s admission in 2023 the MSW and Spiritual Counselor were to see the patient 1 time a month per the plan of care yet monthly visits were not documented in the record. In HosRRNHV#5 the hospice aide frequency per the plan of care was 1 time weekly yet the documentation showed the aid was caring for the patient 3 times a week. In HosRRNHV#6 the MSW was ordered per the POC 1 time a month, yet there were no visits documented March through May. The aide documentation showed visits being made 5 times a week, yet the POC noted a frequency of 3 times a week. In HosRRNHV#8 the MSW documented visits in July,August, and September yet no frequency was established in the POC until late September. In HosRRNHV#9 the only frequency established per the POC was for spiritual counselor yet SN, Aide had documented visits. There was no documentation in the clinical record to explain these variances from the POC. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0555. Standard-level.

  • Program data (42 CFR 418.58(b)(2)(ii))

    “Observed in Data Session. The surveyor noted the HCO did not analyze and compare data over time to identify levels of performance, patterns, trends and variations as evidenced by when reviewing QAPI with the Hospice Director it was noted that each quarter the QAPI stood alone and there was no evidence that the data was trended over time beyond the quarter being reviewed.”

    Rule L0564. Standard-level.

  • Prevention (42 CFR 418.60(a))

    The inspectors’ words, 91 words

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 1 of 3 home visits conducted, the organization failed to implement the infection prevention and control activities it had planned. On home observation for HosRRHV#1 the MSW was noted to not perform hand hygiene throughout the visit. There was no hand hygiene to begin the visit, after contact with the patient, nor was hand hygiene performed after visit concluded. When asked the MSW about hand hygiene she noted she had hand sanitizer in her backpack in the car. This observation was reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0579. Standard-level.

  • Hospice aide assignments and duties (42 CFR 418.76(g)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 122 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the hospice aide were provided written patient care instructions. In review of HosRRHV#2 the aide was assigned to provide care where the patient utilized oxygen continuously however there were no specific instructions to the aide on whether the oxygen should stay in place or could be removed for showering. In HosRRNHV#4 there was documentation that the patient was a Purewick device yet there were no specific instruction on how the Aide was to handle the device while providing care. In HosRRNHV#8 the patient was taking Eliquis yet bleeding precautions were not indicated on the aide plan of care. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0625. Standard-level.

  • Supervision of hospice aides (42 CFR 418.76(h)(1)(i))

    The inspectors’ words, 111 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the RN assess the quality of care and services provided by the hospice aide during an on-site visit to the patient’s home no less frequently that every 14 days. In review of HosRRHV#3 the only aide supervisory visit documented was early October yet the aide was seeing the patient 3 times a week leaving a 40 day gap in supervisory visits to date of survey. In HosRRNHV#10 the aide restarted in early April yet the first aide supervisory was documented in May leaving a 23 day gap. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0629. Standard-level.

  • Recruiting and retaining (42 CFR 418.78(c))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. the organization failed to ensure documentation of its efforts to recruit and retain volunteers as the documentation was unavailable at the time of survey. This observation was reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0645. Standard-level.

  • Cost saving (42 CFR 418.78(d))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. The organization failed to ensure documentation of the cost savings achieved through the use of volunteers. Through discussion with the Hospice Director it was acknowledged that the hospice had no active volunteers for any documentation of cost savings reports at the time of survey.”

    Rule L0646. Standard-level.

  • Level of activity (42 CFR 418.78(e))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. The organization failed to ensure volunteers provided day to day administrative and/or direct patient care services in an amount that, at a minimum, equaled 5% of the total patient care hours of all paid hospice employees and contract staff, as the documentation was not available at time of survey.”

    Rule L0647. Standard-level.

  • Training (42 CFR 418.100(g)(3))

    “Observed in HR File Review. In 3 of 7 HR files reviewed, the organization failed to ensure staff competency was initially assessed and documented as part of orientation. On review of HosHR#1 for the MD, HosHR#6 for volunteer coordinator, and HosHR#7 for the MSW there was no documentation that competency was documented as part of orientation. This observation was reviewed with the Hospice Director and the Peoples Director.”

    Rule L0663. Standard-level.

  • Initial certification of terminal illness (42 CFR 418.102(b)(1))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the medical director provided written certification that the patient’s life expectancy is six months or less if the illness runs is normal course considering the primary terminal condition. On review of HosRRHV#2 the Initial Certification of Terminal Illness noted a primary terminal diagnosis of COPD yet the record noted a primary diagnosis of Atherosclerotic Heart Disease. This observation was reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0667. Standard-level.

  • Recertification of the terminal illness (42 CFR 418.102(c))

    The inspectors’ words, 101 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 10 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure that before the recertification period the medical director or physician designee review the patient’s clinical information. For example: on review of HosRRHV#1 there was no documentation of a certification of terminal illness (CTI) noted in the record for benefit period (BP) #7. In BP #6 the CTI stated a primary terminal diagnosis of Alzheimer’s however the admitting terminal diagnosis was listed as Atherosclerotic Heart Disease. In HosRRNHV#4 there was no documentation of a CTI for BP# 8. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0668. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(3)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 2 patient records reviewed, for live discharge, the organization failed to ensure the discharge summary included all required elements. On review of HosRRDC#2 the discharge summary noted reason for discharge but did not include a summary of the patient’s stay, current plan of care or latest physicians orders. This observation was reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0684. Standard-level.

  • Use and mintenance of equipment and supplies (42 CFR 418.106(f)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 132 words

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 2 of 3 home visits conducted, the organization failed to ensure the patient, as well as the family and/or other caregivers receive instruction in the safe use of durable medical equipment and supplies. For example: on home observation in HosRRHV#1 it was noted that the oxygen concentrator, and e-tank were stored in the closet with clothing and other items stored on top of them. When discussing safe oxygen storage with the caregiver she noted she was not informed that the place oxygen was stored needed to have ventilation. In home observation for HosRRHV#2 there were multiple oxygen tanks noted standing upright, unsecured in the home. The caregiver noted she was unaware of the danger of unsecured upright oxygen tanks. These observations were reviewed with the Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0702. Standard-level.

All 3 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Jan 24, 2025Follow-up inspection by The Joint CommissionNo deficiencies cited
Dec 27, 2024Follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission5 deficiencies cited
Nov 15, 2024Reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission22 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Jun 26, 2015.
  • Ownership: for-profit.
  • Cited at in the last three years: it didn’t meet a whole condition of Medicare’s rules.
Source:

CMS, Hospice General Information. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Has anything been proven against it?

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

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who does the caring?

  • From Medicare claims (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024): 14.6 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 5.4% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 95.7% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 96% at home, 4% in assisted living.
Source:

CMS, Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day14.6 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends5.4%
Visits near death95.7% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • Arrow Holdco 1a LLC owns 100% directly since Apr 20, 2021.
  • 10 owners or officers are people: Mark S. Heaney (runs it (operational or managerial control), 0%); Carrie Coumbs (corporate officer, 0%); Kerri Pendley (corporate officer, 0%); Peter Brodnitz (runs it (operational or managerial control), 0%); Egor Bulavintsev (runs it (operational or managerial control), 0%); Raju Paulose (corporate officer, 0%); Christopher Ruth (runs it (operational or managerial control), 0%); Judith Ann Brummet (corporate director, 0%); Judith Ann Brummet (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Dimple Butler (managing employee (under contract), 0%).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospice All Owners and Hospice Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Arrow Home Health LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Apr 20, 2021
Arrow Holdco 1a LLCOwns 5% or more directly100%Apr 20, 2021
Star Mountain Diversified Credit Income Fund III LPOwns 5% or more through other companies45.49%Apr 20, 2021
Fh Arrow LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies19.55%Apr 20, 2021
Star Mountain Strategic Credit Income Fund IV (Funding), LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies15.45%Apr 20, 2021
Star Mountain Sbic Fund LPOwns 5% or more through other companies12.18%Apr 20, 2021

What do families say?

  • CMS gives no family caregiver survey rating: “The number of cases is too small to report Star Ratings.”
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 9 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 90.91% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 52.3% had visits from a nurse or social worker on at least 2 of their last 3 days (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
Source:

CMS, CAHPS Hospice Survey and Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Family caregiver survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of patients’ family caregivers, 1 to 5Not rated
Hospice Care IndexCMS’s Hospice Care Index, 0 to 10 (higher is better): a point for each of ten measures from Medicare claims on which the hospice meets CMS’s threshold9 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 101 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 78229, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 4; this one had 27.
Source:

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • CMS ended its Special Focus Program for hospices with serious problems on Feb 14, 2025, so no hospice is marked as one.
  • Hospice quality measures have a gap from October 2025: CMS replaced its patient assessment then, and public results from the new one (HOPE) are expected around November 2027.

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 27, 2026.

From the hospice

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

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospice 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 hospice”, 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.