Hearth Record

Generations Hospice and Palliative Care

A hospice in Houston, Texas 77074

9100 Southwest Freeway Suite 105-A, Houston, Texas 77074. (281) 667-9409.

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 9 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Nov 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?

9 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 74 hospices serving ZIP code 77074 had 5.

The last inspection on record was on Nov 21, 2024: an initial inspection by the Community Health Accreditation Partner.

1 deficiency 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

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

9 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.

Nov 21, 2024: initial inspection by the Community Health Accreditation Partner3 deficiencies
  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(6)(ii))

    The inspectors’ words, 421 words

    “It is required that the documented comprehensive assessment includes a drug profile that contains the patient’s current prescription and over-the-counter (OTC) drugs, supplements, herbal remedies and other alternative treatments that could affect drug therapy. The medication review process includes the identification of the effectiveness of drug therapy, drug side effects, actual or potential drug interactions, duplicate drug therapy, and drug therapy associated with laboratory monitoring. The assessment includes evidence that common side effects of medication in the hospice populations are anticipated, and as appropriate, preventive measurements are implemented to manage the side effects. The drug profile is updated per the hospice policy and procedure, but, at minimum, at the time of each comprehensive assessment and/or when new medication is added, or changes are made to existing medication. This standard was not met as evidenced by clinical record review, interview and observation. In 1 of 3 (33%) clinical record reviews and home visit observations revealed the agency did not ensure that the comprehensive assessment drug profile contained all of the patient’s prescription and over-the-counter medications and medication reviews were completed. Document 1: The agency’s policy read it part, “The hospice will develop a medication profile, upon admission, with all the medications the patient is taking, including over-the-counter and herbal medications, and obtain a physician order. Update the Medication Profile with each physician order including new medications, changes in medications, and discontinued medications”. (Medication Management) (JCC 013115) Clinical Record 1/Home Visit 1: A home visit (Home Visit 1) was conducted on 11/20/2024 with the Registered Nurse (RN) Personnel Record 1). A review of the patient’s medications and the comprehensive medication profile revealed Senna Plus (bottle label dated 11/12/2024 and instructions to take three (3) tablets twice daily), Hyoscyamine 0.125mg (with a bottle label dated 02/24/2024 every four hours as needed), and Lorazepam (bottle label dated 11/12/2024) 0.5mg twice daily (medication profile instruction was one tablet every two (2) hours as needed for anxiety) were not included in the Plan of Care for the certification period of 09/30/2024 to 12/29/2024. As a result, the medication review that included all medications was not performed. The caregiver confirmed that the medications and instructions were not new, and the label dates were for refills. In an interview with the RN, the RN stated she would have to check with the patient’s pharmacy about the medications and instructions. In an interview with the Director of Clinical Services (DCS) on 11/21/2024, the DCS stated that the medication profile was updated but that the nurse had not reconciled the medications.”

    Rule L0530. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 268 words

    “It is required that hospice volunteers provide day-to-day administrative or direct patient care services in an amount that, at a minimum, equals five percent (5%) of the total patient care hours of all paid hospice employees and contract staff. The hospice documents the cost savings achieved through volunteers. Documentation includes the identification of each position that is occupied by a volunteer, the work time spent by volunteers occupying those positions, and estimates of the dollar costs that the hospice would have incurred if paid employees occupied the positions noted in Item 1 and for the duration noted in Item 2. This standard was not met as evidenced by document review and interview revealed the agency did not ensure the Volunteer cost savings equaled five percent (5%) of the total patient care hours of all paid hospice employees and contract staff was achieved through volunteer services. Document: Agency Volunteer cost savings report revealed that the agency was tracking volunteer hours but was unable to produce evidence that the 5% requirement was met for the total patient care hours of all paid hospice employees and contract staff through volunteer services. In an interview with the Administrator/Volunteer Coordinator (VC), the VC stated she was utilizing a spreadsheet with a formula that was no longer working and therefore was unable to provide evidence of the 5% requirement. A review of the volunteer cost savings report revealed that the agency was tracking volunteer hours but was unable to produce evidence that the 5% requirement was met for the total patient care hours of all paid hospice employees and contract staff through volunteer services.”

    Rule L0647. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(2)(i))

    The inspectors’ words, 246 words

    “It is required that if a patient revokes the election of hospice care or is discharged from hospice per hospice regulation §418.26 (i.e., no longer terminally ill), the hospice forwards to the patient’s attending physician a copy of the hospice discharge summary and the patient’s record if requested. This standard was not met as evidenced by clinical record review and interview. In 2 of 2 (100%) clinical records for patients who revoked hospice services revealed the agency did not ensure that the discharge summaries were forwarded to the attending physician. Clinical Record 4: The patient was admitted to hospice services on 04/27/2024 with diagnoses of Intrahepatic Bile Duct Carcinoma, Alcoholic Cirrhosis of the liver with ascites, and Myelofibrosis. On 05/01/2024, the patient revoked services seeking aggressive treatment. There was no documented evidence that the discharge summary was sent to the attending physician. Clinical Record 6: The patient was admitted to hospice services on 07/01/2024 with diagnoses of Hypertensive Heart Disease with Heart Failure, Alcoholic Liver Cirrhosis without Ascites, Viral Hepatitis C, Seizure Disorder, Late Effects of CVA, Esophageal Varices, and Gastrointestinal bleeding. On 09/06/2024, the patient revoked services seeking aggressive treatment. There was no documented evidence that the discharge summary was sent to the attending physician. In an interview with the Administrator and the Director of Clinical Services (DCS) on 11/21/2024, the DCS stated that she believed the summaries were sent but the administrator and DCS were unable to provide evidence that the summaries were sent.”

    Rule L0683. Standard-level.

Sep 6, 2024: initial inspection by the Community Health Accreditation Partner6 deficiencies
  • Clinical records (42 CFR 418.104)

    The inspectors’ words, 194 words

    “It is required that a patient clinical record containing past and current findings is maintained for each hospice patient. The record contains correct clinical information that is available to the patient’s attending physician and hospice staff. The clinical record may be maintained electronically. THIS IS A CMS CONDITION LEVEL DEFICIENCY This CONDITION was not met as evidenced by a review of clinical records and interviews with the which revealed the hospice: Failed to ensure that the clinical record included updated plans of care {HSIM.3. I/L672}; Failed to ensure the entries in the patient records were appropriately authenticated by the person performing the care or service {HSIM.4. I/ L679} and Failed to ensure that the plan of care was individualized, reviewed, or revised as frequently as the patient’s condition requires, but no less frequently than every 15 calendar days {HCPC.22. I/L552}. The cumulative effect of these systemic problems resulted in the hospice agency’s inability to ensure the provision of quality health care in a safe environment for the condition of participation CFR 418.104: Clinical Records. The deficient practice illustrated systemic process failures that had the potential to affect all patients cared for by the agency.”

    Rule L0670. Condition-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 358 words

    “It is required that the patient’s pain is assessed as part of a comprehensive assessment. The documented assessment of the patient’s pain includes. history of pain and its treatment, both pharmacological and non-pharmacological, use of a standardized pain assessment tool appropriate to the patient’s developmental and cognitive status; characteristics of the pain, including location, frequency, and intensity. How pain impacts the patient’s ability to engage in usual activities and function (e.g., appetite, sleeping), and the patient’s/family’s goals for pain management and their satisfaction with the current level of pain control. This standard was not met as evidenced by clinical record review and interview. In 1 of 5 (20%) clinical records reviewed revealed that the agency did not ensure that the pain assessment included location, characteristics, duration, frequency or how it impacts the patient’s function. Clinical Record 2: The patient elected the hospice benefit on 07/01/2024 with a diagnosis of Hypertensive Heart Disease. The initial certificate of terminal illness written by the medical director on 07/02/2024 stated “pain requiring the use of opioids.” In the initial RN assessment dated 07/01/2024 the RN documented “patient pain goals is to be pain free and comfortable.” She documented “yes, pain is an active problem for the patient.” The RN did not document a thorough pain assessment that included location, character, duration, frequency, what relieves/worsens pain, and effect on function and quality of life. On the RN assessment dated 07/17/2024 the patient reported mild pain (1-3). The RN did not document location, character, duration, frequency, or effect on function or quality of life. Home visit (home visit 2) with the Chaplain (Personnel Record 1), the patient was awake and sitting up on her couch. She engaged in meaningful conversation and answered questions appropriately. In an interview with the Director of Clinical she stated that the RN did not get the details of pain due to the patient’s cognition, however the RN documented the patient was alert and oriented times 1. When the surveyor visited (home visit 2) the patient with the Chaplain (Personnel Record 1), she was awake and sitting up on her couch. She engaged in meaningful conversation and answered questions appropriately.”

    Rule L0524. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(3))

    The inspectors’ words, 440 words

    “It is required that each patient’s individualized written plan of care: includes all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness, including the following, measurable outcomes anticipated from implementing and coordinating the plan of care. This standard was not met as evidenced by clinical record review and interview. In 2 of 5 (40%) clinical records reviewed revealed that the agency did not ensure that the plan of care included measurable outcomes anticipated from implementing and coordinating the plan of care. Clinical Record 1: Patient elected hospice benefit on 06/14/2024 with a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease. On the initial RN assessment, the RN documented “shortness of breath with minimal exertion.” and “generalized pain that is dull on a daily basis. Patient is being treated with Tylenol 325mg by mouth as needed.” On the plan of care dated 06/28/2024 there were no measurable outcomes anticipated from implementing and coordinating the plan of care. A problem of decreased endurance was identified, interventions were “monitor respiratory status and teach methods for increasing exercise tolerance”. Outcomes were “symptoms managed”. The patient has an active problem of generalized pain documented on the initial RN assessment dated 06/14/2024. Pain was also documented on RN assessment dated 06/20/2024 as mild (1-3), 06/26/2024 as mild (1-3). On the plan of care dated 06/28/2024 pain average and location were not addressed. Interventions included “Monitor pain control, teach diversion/relaxation techniques, teach med regimen to control pain, teach comfort measures”. Outcomes documented were “Pain goal with no goal listed, compliance of pain med regiment, and symptoms managed”. The same was documented on IDT plans of care dated 07/12/2024, 07/26/2024, 08/09/2024, and 08/2023. Clinical Record 3: The patient elected the hospice benefit on 07/02/2024 with a diagnosis of End Stage Renal Disease. On the initial RN comprehensive assessment dated 07/02/2024, the RN documented that the patient had constant pain in bilateral lower extremities that the patient rated 2 out of 10, the same was documented by the RN on the assessment dated 07/09/2024. The RN documented that pain was an active problem for the patient. On the plan of care dated 07/12/2024, physical comfort and pain were listed as a problem for the patient interventions included monitor pain control, teach diversion/relaxation techniques, teach medication regimen to control pain, teach comfort measures. Outcomes were listed as pain control with no goal filled in, symptoms measured with explanation how the symptoms would be measured. The same was documented on plan of care updates dated 07/26/2024, 08/09/2024, and 08/23/2024. In an interview with the director of nursing she agreed that the outcomes were not measurable, and conversation was had about developing measurable outcomes.”

    Rule L0548. Standard-level.

  • Review of the plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 235 words

    “It is required that the Interdisciplinary Group, in collaboration with the individual’s attending physician (if any), reviews, revises, and documents the individualized care plan: as frequently as the patient’s condition requires; but no less frequently than every 15 calendar days. This standard was not met as evidenced by clinical record review and interview. In 1 of 5 (20%) clinical records reviewed revealed that the agency did not ensure that the plan of care was individualized, reviewed, or revised as frequently as the patient’s condition requires, but no less frequently than every 15 calendar days. Clinical Record 2: The patient elected hospice services on 07/01//2024. IDG care plan updates dated 07/12/2024, 07/26/2024, 08/09/2024, and 08/23/2024 were all photocopied with no changes made to any of the care plans. However, there was no evidence of the IDT’s review or revision of the plan of cares. This was evident by 100% of matching verbiage, identical blanks on plan of care, and identical narrative notes. There was no evidence that the IDT team was reviewing the plan of care or documenting record of the patients progress toward goals no less than every 15 days. In an interview with the director of nursing and administrator there was no explanation why these notes were photocopied. The DON stated that the nurses email them the notes and they put them in the chart. She did not realize the notes had been photocopied.”

    Rule L0552. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 293 words

    “It is required that a patient clinical record containing past and current findings is maintained for each hospice patient. The record contains correct clinical information that is available to the patient’s attending physician and hospice staff. The record may be maintained electronically or on paper. Each patient’s record includes, at a minimum. Updated plans of care. This standard was not met as evidenced by clinical record review and interview. In 1 of 5 (20%) clinical records reviewed revealed that the agency did not ensure that the clinical record included updated plans of care. Clinical Record 2: The patient elected hospice services on 07/01/2024. IDG care plan updates dated 07/12/2024, 07/26/2024, 08/09/2024, and 08/23/2024 were all photocopied with no changes made to any of the care plans. This was evident by 100% of matching verbiage, identical blanks on plan of care, and identical narrative notes. There was no evidence that the IDT reviewed the plan of care, updated the care plans, and documented the patients progress toward goals in the clinical record. In an interview with the director of nursing and administrator there was no explanation why these notes were photocopied. A visit was made by the RN on 07/24/2024 and documented on the clinical visit notes. A visit made on 08/21/2024 was a photocopy of the 07/24/2024 visit note, only the date and time had been changed. A visit was also made on 07/31/2024 and documented on clinical visit notes. The documentation on 08/28/2024 was a photocopy of the visit made on 07/31/2024 with only the date and time changed. In an interview with the Director of Nursing she stated that the nurses email them the notes and they put them in the chart. She did not realize the notes had been photocopied.”

    Rule L0672. Standard-level.

  • Authentication (42 CFR 418.104(b))

    The inspectors’ words, 283 words

    “It is required that all entries in the patient record are legible, complete, and appropriately authenticated and dated by the person performing the care/service in accordance with hospice policy and with currently acceptable standards of practice. The hospice has a means to authenticate entries or to identify the author of each entry. This standard was not met as evidenced by clinical record review and interview. In 1 of 5 (20%) clinical records reviewed revealed that the agency did not ensure the entries in the patient records were appropriately authenticated by the person performing the care or service. Clinical Record 2: The patient elected the hospice benefit on 07/01/2024. A visit was made by the Registered Nurse (RN) on 07/24/2024 and documented on the appropriate forms. A visit made on 08/21/2024 was a photocopy of the 07/24/2024 visit only the date and time had been changed. A visit was also made on 07/31/2024 and documented on correct forms. The documentation on 08/28/2024 was a photocopy of the visit made on 07/31/2024 with only the date and time changed. Clinical Record 2: During review of the clinical record, it was found that IDT meeting notes were photocopied for the dates of 07/12/2024, 07/26/2024, 08/09/2024, and 08/23/2024. All 4 of the date’s documentation were exactly the same including evidence of white out used in areas of dates and times. In an interview with the director of nursing on 09/05/2024 she reviewed the documents in question. The RN assessments and the IDG care plans. She did not have any explanation as to why the documents were photocopied and only said that the RN are responsible for emailing the completed documents to her to put the patients record.”

    Rule L0679. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Nov 21, 2024Initial inspection by the Community Health Accreditation Partner3 deficiencies cited
Sep 6, 2024Initial inspection by the Community Health Accreditation Partner6 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Dec 2, 2024.
  • CMS doesn’t list its type of ownership.
  • 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?

  • CMS hasn’t published nursing time from Medicare claims for this hospice.
Source:

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

Who owns it?

  • 5 owners or officers are people: Fefi James (corporate officer, 100%); Fefi James (corporate director, 100%); Fefi James (managing employee (on the payroll), 100%); Dina Soliz (owns 5% or more directly, 50%); Fefi James (owns 5% or more directly, 50%).
  • 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.

What do families say?

  • CMS gives no family caregiver survey rating: “The number of cases is too small to report Star Ratings.”
  • CMS gives no Hospice Care Index for this hospice.
Source:

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

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 74 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 77074, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 5; this one had 9.
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.