Hearth Record

Christus Spohn Hospital Corpus Christi

An acute care hospital in Corpus Christi, Texas 78404

600 Elizabeth Street, Corpus Christi, Texas 78404. (361) 902-4103.

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 20, 2026.

The last 24 months 3 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Jul 2026. Most serious: Condition-level. Every month

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

What these words mean4
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.
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?

The last inspection on record was on Sep 3, 2026: a complaint inspection.

3 deficiencies cited in the last three years, 1 of them at condition level, the most serious.

1 deficiency at condition level, the more serious of CMS’s two levels

Source:

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

When those deficiencies happened

3 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Jul 2026. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Nov 5, 2026.

3 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 Dec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNov

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 Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Jul 7, 2026: complaint inspection2 deficiencies
  • Nursing Services

    The inspectors’ words, 153 words

    “NURSING SERVICES CFR(s): 482.23 The hospital must have an organized nursing service that provides 24-hour nursing services. The nursing services must be furnished or supervised by a registered nurse. This Condition is not met as evidenced by: 33326 Based on observation, medical record reviews, policy reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse supervised and evaluated nursing care in accordance with accepted standards of nursing practice and facility policies for 3 of 10 patients (Patients #1, #6, and #10) reviewed. Specifically, nursing staff failed to consistently assess, monitor, document, communicate, and implement interventions for identified skin alterations and wounds, including failure to document wound measurements, failure to document wound characteristics and progression, failure to ensure physician notification and treatment orders, and failure to reassess wounds in accordance with facility policy. These failures had the potential to delay recognition of wound deterioration, infection, and appropriate treatment. Cross refer to A0395”

    Rule A0385. Condition-level. From a complaint.

  • Rn Supervision Of Nursing Care

    The inspectors’ words, 1,685 words

    “RN SUPERVISION OF NURSING CARE CFR(s): 482.23(b)(3) A registered nurse must supervise and evaluate the nursing care for each patient. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: 33326 Based on observation, medical record reviews, policy reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse supervised and evaluated nursing care in accordance with accepted standards of nursing practice and facility policies for 3 of 10 patients (Patients #1, #6, and #10) reviewed. Specifically, nursing staff failed to consistently assess, monitor, document, communicate, and implement interventions for identified skin alterations and wounds, including failure to document wound measurements, failure to document wound characteristics and progression, failure to ensure physician notification and treatment orders, and failure to reassess wounds in accordance with facility policy. These failures had the potential to delay recognition of wound deterioration, infection, and appropriate treatment. Findings include: Review of the facility provided policy “Basic Wound Care-Procedure” (last revised 4/2024) reflected, “1. Wound care treatment will be initiated only after receipt of written orders/referral from a physician. 2. Wound will be evaluated by a Registered Nurse and the Wound Care Physician prior to initiation of treatment. Evaluation will include patient history, wound etiology, wound status, pre-wound characteristics, patient comorbidities, current medications, full systems review and assessment, psychosocial status and needs, spiritual needs, and functional status ...3. Taking photos of wounds ...Wound photos will be taken on admission, weekly with patient reassessment and as needed when there is a significant change in the wound status/appearance ...” Review of the facility provided policy “Pressure Injury Prevention and Management” (reviewed 7/2021) reflected, “4. When a pressure injury is initially identified, the nurse should, notify the patient’s physician and document the findings in the medical record. The patient’s physician, or qualified designee, should evaluate the patient, stage the pressure injury using the NPUAP’s system, and document in the patient’s medical record. The pressure injury stage will guide the selection of therapeutic interventions ... 5. Each pressure injury that develops should be documented in the patient’s medical record. 6. Patients admitted with an existing pressure injury are considered to be at high risk and the care plan should reflect impaired skin integrity. In some circumstances depending on the acuity of the patient, review of skin breakdown may be secondary to other emergent measures. 7. All patients admitted with, or developing, a pressure injury should have the wound measured using photography and a recognized available measurement system. Measurements should be completed and documented on admission, weekly, and on discharge. 8. The patient’s physician, or qualified designee, shall be responsible for writing orders for any medications, treatments, or pressure reducing equipment to be administered or used. Treatment plans will be individualized based on assessment and reassessment. It is recommended that a multi-disciplinary team be involved in the pressure injury management. Additionally, the physician, or designee, may initiate a Wound Care Consult as indicated or if the wound(s) shows no signs of improvement with the current pressure injury interventions. 9. The pressure injury, any dressings, and the patient’s response to treatment interventions will be reassessed each shift by a RN or LVN. Documentation will be recorded in the patient’s medical record.” 1.) Patient #1: Review of Patient #1’s medical records reflected an admission of a 52-year-old-male admitted on 7/04/2026 for an infected fistula (intra-venous line used to provide dialysis treatments). An observation on the afternoon of 7/6/2026, at 2:00 pm of the facility’s medical surgical unit revealed Patient #1 had a gauze wrap covering his upper left forearm. The gauze wrap was not dated when it had been applied, and you could not see through the gauze. Review of Patient #1’s photographed left forearm skin picture, dated 7/4/26, revealed a large reddened/swollen area of approximately 8 cm (centimeters) X 6 cm, extending from the upper left forearm to the bend of the arm. Below the bend, there were numerous dark purple bruising in multiple locations. The fistula site, located on the upper left forearm, had a blackened spot surrounded by a white exudate as well as a small scab next to the site. Review of Patient #1’s nursing skin assessment dated 7/6/2026 at 1:30 pm reflected “Epidermis thin with loss of subcutaneous Tissue”. The assessment did not include any dimensions or further description of the impairment, and did not include a photograph. During an interview, on 7/7/2026 at 3:15 pm, Staff #10, Chief Medical officer, when asked if someone was admitted with signs of cellulitis (reddened, swollen), what should the nurses do? Staff #10, Chief Medical Officer stated, “Usually I would tell them to mark out the site (draw a ring around the reddened swollen area to determine if the swelling has gone down or increased) and because I’m putting them on antibiotics I want to see if the antibiotic works.” During an interview, on 7/6/26 at 1:00 pm, in the administrative conference room, Staff #2, Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed Patient #1’s physician’s orders did not include the treatment of the infection site and confirmed the facility did not have a policy for assessing and monitoring of cellulitis. 2.) Patient #6: During a review of patient #6’s medical records, reflected an admission on 12/5/25. Patient #6’s medical records included a picture dated 12/18/2025, taken by a nurse, revealing an open area on the buttocks with a moist white center with a redden area surrounding the wound. The size of wound was not identified in the picture. The wound appeared to be approximately 6 cm x 3 cm with full thickness of skin loss. The nurse’s note, documented reflected, “Wound 12/18/25 Skin Tear Sacrum (Active) Date First Assessed/Time First Assessed: 12/18/25 0700 Primary Wound Type: Skin Tear Location: Sacrum”. The nurse’s notes did not describe the treatment or preventions put in place to prevent further skin deterioration. During an interview on the morning of 7/7/26 at 12:15 pm, in a conference room, Staff #9, the wound care nurse stated in part; while viewing the Patient #16’s picture dated 12/18/25, the wound care nurse stated in part, that the wound care team had been treating the patient daily for heel/foot wounds. When asked if the wound on the sacrum was a skin tear, Staff #9 stated, “It looks like stage 3 (pressure injury).” Review of the provider note dated 12/30/25 reflected, “Pressure injury of coccygeal region, stage 3 Assessment: Acute Plan: Stage III pressure ulcer to coccyx is showing improvement-continue daily vashe irrigation, triad cream application, as well as offloading patient every 2 hours to prevent further skin breakdown. - Goal: wound closure. Follow up frequency: daily. Response to treatment: improvement.” During an interview on the morning of 7/7/26 at 1:00 pm, Staff #1, DON confirmed the sacral wound was not noted or documented on until 12/18/25 and it was unclear when the wound had developed and what treatments had been attempted. 3.) Patient #10: Review of Patient #10’s medical records revealed an admission on 05/01/2026. Review of Patient #10’s medical records reflected a nurse’s note on 5/15/2026, documented a sacral wound; Wound 05/15/26 Pressure Injury Blister Sacrum (Active) the note did not provide the size, depth or a description of the wound. The nurse did nto take a photograph of the skin impairment or docuement the treatments and preventative measure put in place to prevent further skin deterioration. A review of the physician’s orders for 5/15/2026-5/18/2026, did not include treatment orders for the wound. Review of Patient #10’s medical records revealed, on 05/16/26 at 5:56 am, a wound care consultation was placed by the nurse. Reason for consult? Possible pressure injury Location: SACRUM. The nurse’s notes do not reflect whether the physician was informed or had provided treatment orders. Review of the Patient #10’s nurse’s skin assessments reflected the following treatments: 5/16/26 Open to air; the skin assessment did not include measurements or a picture of the wounds. 5/17/26 Open to air; the skin assessments did not include measurements or a picture of the wounds. 5/18/26 Open to air; the skin assessments did not include measurements or a picture of the wounds. Review of the wound care nurse’s notes dated 5/19/26 revealed a picture was taken of the sacrum wound. The picture revealed an approximately 10 cm (centimeter) X 10 cm circular dark purple area to the left buttocks. Within the purple area were two open wounds, the first was not measured and appeared to be approximately 3 cm x 1 cm and the second was written on a paper measuring tape recorded as “4.5 X 7 X 0.4”; measured in centimeters. During an interview on the afternoon of 7/7/26 at 1:00 pm, in the conference room, Staff #9, wound care nurse stated, “We typically follow-up on the wound consults the next day, this patient came in on a Friday evening, and she (wound care nurse) saw them on Tuesday, I don’t know why they didn’t see them on Monday.” Staff #9 further stated the wound care nurse is not available on the weekends, and the nurses are to use standing protocols for wound care. During an interview on the afternoon of 7/7/26 at 2:00 pm, Staff #1, DON confirmed the lack of a clear picture of the wound progression.” The progression will start with a (stage I) early stage bed sore where the skin remains is intact but appears discolored (red, blue, or purple) and does not turn white when pressed. Stage (II)partial-thickness skin loss with a pink or red moist wound bed, Stage (III) is when the wound penetrates through the skin’s layers, exposing the fatty subcutaneous tissue. Review of the facility provided “Wound care guidance” (undated) (used by the nursing staff as a reference for care) reflected, “Stage III: Full thickness of tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible, but bone, tendon, or muscle are NOT exposed. Slough may be present but DOES NOT obscure the depth of tissue loss. May include undermining and tunneling.*Apply dressing with appropriate treatment, *Consult wound care team and notify Doctor, *No diapers, *Keep wound as clean as possible, *Turn patient every 2 hrs, *Needs specialty mattress, *Consult dietary, Light/Moderate drainage: Cleanse with normal saline/vashe and apply wet to moist dressing””

    Rule A0395. Standard-level. From a complaint.

Mar 28, 2025: complaint inspection1 deficiency
  • Administration Of Drugs

    The inspectors’ words, 635 words

    “ADMINISTRATION OF DRUGS CFR(s): 482.23(c)(1), (c)(1)(i) & (c)(2) (1) Drugs and biologicals must be prepared and administered in accordance with Federal and State laws, the orders of the practitioner or practitioners responsible for the patient’s care as specified under §482.12(c), and accepted standards of practice. (i) Drugs and biologicals may be prepared and administered on the orders of other practitioners not specified under §482.12(c) only if such practitioners are acting in accordance with State law, including scope of practice laws, hospital policies, and medical staff bylaws, rules, and regulations. (2) All drugs and biologicals must be administered by, or under supervision of, nursing or other personnel in accordance with Federal and State laws and regulations, including applicable licensing requirements, and in accordance with the approved medical staff policies and procedures. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: 21935 Based on interviews with patient/complainant, attending emergency nurse, reviews of medical record and facility medication administration policy medication was not administered on the orders of the emergency room practitioner. Findings: a. Interview with complainant/interviewee #1 on March 26, 2025 at 1:32pm via telephone who explained she came to the emergency department on January 30, 2024 at 8:32 pm with chief complaints of chest pain and diaphoresis. The patient explained that she was assessed and received a medical screening. It was explained by the provider that the patient would receive medication to relieve pain. The patient said she waited several hours and never received this medication which would relieve her symptoms. The pain eventually subsided on its own without medications. She said she requested to leave the facility after several hours. She was advised not to leave. She was given some of the medications that she was promised earlier for treatment before she left the facility. She signed out against medical advice. b. Interview interviewee #3, Patient of concern attending emergency room nurse on March 28, 2025 at 6:16 pm who remembered the patient and admitted that she felt bad about this patient. Interviewee #3, RN said she had 4 other patients and she was trying to get to this patient room to give her the medications ordered. But everytime she tried to go to the patient of concerns room a more urgent matter would come up with one of the other 4 patient and she would have to re-direct and respond to one the other 4 patients. She said it was a very busy shift. She finally explained the matter to the charge nurse and asked charge nurse to check on the patient and administer ordered medications. c. Review of providers orders January 30, 2025 documented patient was to receive medications including Zofran injection 4mg, Morphine 4mg/ml injection, At 9:14pm on January 30, 2025 orders were added to give patient chewable aspirin 3.24mg and Nitroglycerin SL Tablet 0.4mg PO by provider Valerie Knudson,DO. Orders for Lovenox syringe 100 mg and Plavix tablet 300mg was ordered at 10:15pm. Medical record documentation shows the patient receiving Zofran injection via peripheral IV, Aspirin chewable tablet 325mg, Plavix tablet 300mg and Lovenox 100mg. Medications were administered after the patient stated that she wanted to leave the hospital and before she sign out AMA These medications were administer at 1:15am-1:16 am on January 31, 2025. d. Review of facility Medication Administration Policy Procedure H-142-p last revised in 2024. On page 1 of 4 under procedure section 4 it states “All Medications should be given via the reported route ordered by the practitioner.” The patient was ordered by practitioner at 9:14pm on January 30, 2025 to take oral medications chewable aspirin, 3. 24mg, Nitroglycerin sub-lingual tablet, Plavix tablet 300mg, Zofran injection 4mg and Lovenox syringe 100mg. -The patient was not given oral medications until after 1 am January 31, 2025 after she threatened to leave the emergency room Against medical advice (AMA).”

    Rule A0405. Standard-level. From a complaint.

All 20 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Sep 3, 2026Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Jul 7, 2026Complaint inspection2 deficiencies cited
Jan 30, 2026Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Jan 21, 2026Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Dec 22, 2025Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Oct 30, 2025Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Sep 5, 2025Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Jul 22, 2025Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
May 20, 2025Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Mar 28, 2025Complaint inspection1 deficiency cited
Mar 26, 2025Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Mar 25, 2025Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Dec 30, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Dec 17, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Nov 20, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Oct 24, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Jul 10, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Mar 12, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Dec 6, 2023Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Nov 27, 2023Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited

How do patients fare?

  • CMS’s overall for it is 3 of 5.
  • Of the measures behind its , CMS counts against the national value: mortality, 0 better and 0 worse of 8; safety of care, 4 better and 0 worse of 7; readmission, 0 better and 1 worse of 11.
  • Patients rate it 3 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (474 surveys completed, Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): 72% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 72% would definitely recommend it.
  • Infections, compared by CMS with the national benchmark (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): central line bloodstream infections (CLABSI), better than the national benchmark; catheter urinary tract infections (CAUTI), better than the national benchmark; surgical site infections after colon surgery, better than the national benchmark; MRSA bloodstream infections, no different than national benchmark; C. diff infections, better than the national benchmark.
  • CMS’s patient safety composite for serious complications, PSI 90, Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2024: no different than the national value.
  • Deaths within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 11.5%, heart failure 10.3%, pneumonia 12.9%, COPD 8.7%, stroke 12.9%, heart bypass surgery 4.4%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • Readmissions within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2023 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 14.2%, heart failure 18.9%, pneumonia 17.6%, COPD 18.3%, heart bypass surgery 12%, hip or knee replacement 6.5%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • After outpatient care, compared by CMS: unplanned hospital visits after a colonoscopy, no different than the national rate; hospital admissions after outpatient chemotherapy, no different than the national rate; emergency visits after outpatient chemotherapy, no different than the national rate; unplanned hospital visits after outpatient surgery, no different than expected.
  • Emergency department patients spent a median of 188 minutes there before leaving (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025), and 1% left before being seen.
  • 83% of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock got the care CMS measures, SEP-1 (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025).
  • Medicare’s spending per patient here is 1.09 times the national median (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024).
Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Overall ratingCMS’s overall hospital quality star rating, 1 to 53 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the hospital’s patients (HCAHPS), 1 to 53 of 5

Is it certified, and in good standing?

  • Medicare-certified acute care hospital since Jan 1, 1968.
  • Ownership: voluntary non-profit - private.
  • It is accredited by The Joint Commission, whose surveys stand in for the state’s routine inspections.
  • Cited at in the last three years: it didn’t meet a whole condition of Medicare’s rules for hospitals.
  • It has an inpatient rehabilitation unit of 30 beds, which CMS lists apart as a rehabilitation facility.
  • Voluntary non-profit - Private.
Source:

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Has it been penalized?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals.
  • Not among the hospitals whose Medicare payments CMS cut under the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program for fiscal year 2026.
  • 3 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated yearly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

What do patients say about their care?

  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In CMS’s patient survey, patients rate how well its nurses communicated 3 of 5.
  • 72% of its health care workers got a flu shot (Oct 1, 2024 to Mar 31, 2025).
Source:

CMS, Patient survey (HCAHPS) - Hospital and Timely and Effective Care - Hospital. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who owns it?

  • Christus Health owns 100% directly since Feb 1, 1999.
  • 14 owners or officers are people: Cynthia Barrera (corporate director); John Christopher Glenney (corporate director); Rebecca B Rios (corporate officer); Rebecca B Rios (managing employee (on the payroll)); Bill Colston (corporate director); Gabriel Guerra (corporate director); Mary C Henry (corporate director); Dominic Dominguez (corporate officer); Dominic Dominguez (corporate director); Orel M Everett (corporate director); Kirkby E Townsend (corporate director); Audrey Webber (corporate director); Yvonne H Hinojosa (corporate director); Shah Faizul Islam (corporate director).
  • CMS’s Provider of Services file records 3 changes of ownership.
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospital All Owners and Hospital Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated monthly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Christus HealthOwns 5% or more directly100%Feb 1, 1999
Nueces County Hospital DistrictOther role (CMS gives no detail)0%Oct 1, 2012

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 4 hospitals CMS lists in Nueces County, 2 have an overall star rating from CMS: 1 rated 4 of 5, 1 rated 3 of 5.
  • CMS rates this one 3 of 5.
Source:

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals, so none are shown. The one payment cut CMS publishes for each hospital, under its Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program, is shown where it applies.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • Most hospitals are accredited by a private organisation (The Joint Commission, DNV and others) whose routine inspections stand in for the state’s; those reports aren’t public, and QCOR holds only the state’s surveys: no inspection on record here doesn’t mean none took place.
  • QCOR says its hospital inspection data are complete only through September 17, 2026, while it moves to a new system.
  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In its September 2026 release CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for death and readmission rates, though it gives the rates.

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 Nov 5, 2026.

From the hospital

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

Replies

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