Hearth Record

Texas Childrens Hospital North Austin Campus

A children’s hospital in Austin, Texas 78717

9835 North Lake Creek Parkway Bldg A, Austin, Texas 78717. (832) 824-1100.

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 4 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jun 2025. 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?

The last inspection on record was on Jun 11, 2025: a complaint inspection.

4 deficiencies cited in the last three years, 2 of them at condition level, the most serious.

2 deficiencies 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

4 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jun 2025. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Nov 5, 2026.

4 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.

Jun 11, 2025: complaint inspection4 deficiencies
  • Food And Dietetic Services

    The inspectors’ words, 285 words

    “FOOD AND DIETETIC SERVICES CFR(s): 482.28 The hospital must have organized dietary services that are directed and staffed by adequate qualified personnel. However, a hospital that has a contract with an outside food management company may be found to meet this Condition of Participation if the company has a dietitian who serves the hospital on a full-time, part-time, or consultant basis, and if the company maintains at least the minimum standards specified in this section and provides for constant liaison with the hospital medical staff for recommendations on dietetic policies affecting patient treatment. This Condition is not met as evidenced by: 33326 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to meet the conditions of participation for Dietary Services when; - The facility’s two commercial food steamers had copious amounts of rust on the interior rails, fan, and floor of the steamers, when in use the high- pressure steam can disperse the rust onto the food product. - The facility’s two large convection ovens had burnt food debris and food residue in both ovens. The oven’s interior rails and doors had burned on food debris, which could chip and be dispersed by the oven’s fans onto other foods. - The facility’s bulk food storage bins and clean storage shelf covers had dried food on their surfaces. - The facility’s labeling system, used to determine when items were received, opened, and expired was not being implemented. - The facility’s food slicer had dried food debris on the slicers blade and on the food holding arm. - Floor cleaning chemicals were being stored next to clean food preparation gloves and the dirty dishware were being stored next to clean cooking supplies. Cross refers to: A0619”

    Rule A0618. Condition-level. From a complaint.

  • Surgical Services

    The inspectors’ words, 148 words

    “SURGICAL SERVICES CFR(s): 482.51 If the hospital provides surgical services, the services must be well organized and provided in accordance with acceptable standards of practice. If outpatient surgical services are offered the services must be consistent in quality with inpatient care in accordance with the complexity of services offered. This Condition is not met as evidenced by: 33326 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to meet the conditions of participation for Surgical Services when, a.) The facility’s operating room #1 was being maintained at a temperature above the AORN (Association of perioperative Nurses) recommended, 75-degree Fahrenheit; sterile supplies and heat sensitive equipment were being stored in the room. b.) The facility’s surgical staff were not using appropriate hand hygiene, creating an unsanitary environment. c.) The facility was storing opened unprotected sterile supplies, leaving them available for future use. Cross refers to: A0941 Surgical Services”

    Rule A0940. Condition-level. From a complaint.

  • Organization

    The inspectors’ words, 484 words

    “ORGANIZATION CFR(s): 482.28(a) Organization This Standard is not met as evidenced by: 33326 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary environment for the safe production, and storage of food provided to the hospital’s pediatric, adolescent, and adult patient population, placing all patients at risk of food borne illnesses due to cross contaminated and expired foods. Findings include: Observations made during a tour of the facility’s kitchen on the morning of 6/9/2025 revealed the following: - The facility’s two commercial food steamers had copious amounts of rust on the interior rails, fan, and floor of the steamers, when in use the high- pressure steam can disperse the rust onto the food product. The steamers were still currently being used. - The facility’s two large convection ovens had burnt food debris and food residue in both ovens. The oven’s interior rails and doors had burned on food debris, which could chip and be dispersed by the oven’s fans onto other foods; the ovens were currently in use. - The facility’s bulk food storage bins and clean storage shelf covers had dried food on their surfaces. - The facility’s labeling system, used to determine when items were received, opened, and expired was not being implemented; multiple opened food items that were not dated as to when they were opened or when they would expire. - The facility’s food mixer had food debris to the upper mixing mechanism. - Two food cooking steam cauldron’s had food debris encrusted around the equipments pivoting bolts. - The facility’s food slicer had dried food debris on the slicers blade and on the food holding arm; there was no sign to indicate the slicer required cleaning and the slicer was available for use. - Floor cleaning chemicals were being stored on a shelf next to clean food preparation gloves and dirty dishware were being stored next to clean cooking supplies. During an interview, on the morning of 6/9/2025 in the facility’s kitchen during the tour, Staff #13, Food Services Director was present to confirm the findings. Staff #13 stated in part, the facility had work orders in for the steamers and stated their accrediting organization had mentioned the labels too. Review of the facility provided policy, “Sanitation and Infection Prevention/control” “Cleaning of Food and Nonfood Contact surfaces” (revised 1/25) reflected, “To prevent cross-contamination, kitchenware and food-contact surfaces of equipment shall be washed, rinsed, and sanitized after each use and following interruption of operations during which time contamination may have occurred...food-contact surfaces of all cooking equipment shall be kept free of encrusted grease deposits and other accumulated soil...Nonfood Contact surfaces of utensils and equipment must be made of materials that are safe, corrosion resistant...and maintained in good condition...nonfood contact surfaces of equipment...shall be cleaned as often as is necessary to keep the equipment free of accumulation of dust, dirt, food particles, and other debris.”

    Rule A0619. Standard-level. From a complaint.

  • Organization Of Surgical Services

    The inspectors’ words, 1,258 words

    “ORGANIZATION OF SURGICAL SERVICES CFR(s): 482.51(a) The organization of the surgical services must be appropriate to the scope of the services offered. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: 33326 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide surgical services in a safe environment when, a.) The facility’s trauma operating room was being maintained above 75 degrees Fahrenheit placing patient at risk of injury and infections from degraded medical supplies and the medical equipment in the room overheating and malfunctioning from the continued elevated temperatures. b.) The facility’s surgical staff were not using appropriate hand hygiene practices, placing patients at risk of cross contamination and infections. c.) Opened sterile supplies were not being protected from contamination and were left available for use in operating room #2. Findings include: a.) Review of “Guidelines for Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices.” Association of perioperative Registered Nurses-2019 Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices, e-AORN, Table 3 reflected, “Temperature should be maintained between 68 degrees F to 75 degrees Fahrenheit (20 degrees to 24 Celsius) within the operating room suite.” An observation, on the morning of 6/10/25, in the facility’s operating room #1 revealed and temperature monitor on the rooms inner wall, the temperature was 80.1 degrees Fahrenheit. During an interview, on the morning of 6/10/25, in the facility’s operating room #1, when asked why the room was so warm, Staff #14 stated, “This is the Pediatric trauma room, we keep it at 80 for emergency cases.” Review of the facility provided Operating Room #1’s temperature logs reflected, from 5/09/25 to 6/10/25, the operating room registered being over 75 degrees Fahrenheit for (12) days, and registered being over 80 degrees Fahrenheit for (17) days. Review of the facility provided policy, “Operating Room Temperature and Humidity Maintenance - Procedure” (undated) reflected the following, “1.2 The recommended temperature range for all ORs is 68-73 degrees Fahrenheit. 1.2.1 ORs may go outside of this design temperature set point based on the needs of the patient and/or occupant’s comfort. 1.2.2 The ORs should be returned to the design set point of 68-73 degrees Fahrenheit as soon as possible or immediately upon room turnover. 1.3 The minimum allowable temperature is 62 degrees Fahrenheit and maximum allowable is 80 degrees Fahrenheit as programmed by facilities.” During an interview on the afternoon of 6/10/25, in the facility conference room, Staff #14 stated in part the facility’s medical staffs had decided the temperature of the room should be at 80 degrees Fahrenheit for Pediatric/Neonatal trauma patients. Staff #12 was not sure if the facility had researched the appropriate equipment and sterile supplies manufacturer’s recommended temperatures for proper storage temperatures. b.) Review of the facility provided policy, “Hand Hygiene Procedure #1959” (undated) reflected, “The following procedure should be utilized in order to comply with Texas Children’s Policy on Hand Hygiene Guidelines. “1. Based on the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on hand hygiene in health care, hand hygiene should be performed: ...1.3. Before and after touching a patient regardless of whether or not gloves are used. 1.4. Before clean/aseptic (indwelling urinary catheters, peripheral vascular catheters, or other invasive devices) regardless of whether or not gloves are used ... 1.9. Before and after contact with inanimate objects (including medical equipment) in the immediate vicinity of the patient. 1.10. Before donning gloves and after removing gloves. 1.11. Before handling medication or preparing food.” Observation made on 06/10/25 in the facility’s Operating room #2 revealed the following: 11:40 AM - Staff #10 doffed gloves, did not perform hand hygiene (HH), touched equipment at head of bed. 11:42 AM - Staff #10 donned new gloves - no HH performed; taped patient mask, touched equipment, touched patient again. 11:43 AM - Staff #8 moved waste bin, doffed gloves, did not perform hand hygiene (HH), touched computer. 11:53 AM - Staff #10 touched computer without gloves, moved chair, walked to corner of room, obtained supplies from cabinet, returned to patient stretcher, touched patient monitor, doffed gloves, no HH performed. 11:56 AM - Staff #10 obtained new gloves and placed them on his computer. 11:58 AM - Staff #10 donned new gloves from computer (no HH performed), touched patient monitor, touched chair, touched patient drape, touched computer, touched scrub pants. 12:00 PM - Staff #10 (same gloves) touched patient bag valve mask (BVM), touched computer, touched patient monitor, touched computer, sat in chair. 12:01 PM - Staff #8 removed gloves, did not perform HH, touched equipment, touched cabinet doors near operating room (OR) door, touched computer. 12:07 PM - Staff #10 (same gloves) touched monitors, touched armrests of chair. 12:09 PM - Staff #10 (same gloves) touched computer. 12:34 PM - Staff #10 doffed and donned new gloves. No HH performed. Touched patient monitor, touched computer, moved across room to supply cabinet, removed supplies, returned to patient bedside, touched computer, returned to chair. 12:40 to 12:50 PM - Staff #10 (same gloves) removed Bair Hugger tubing from blanket covering patient, touched stretcher and equipment, touched patient monitor, obtained medications from cart next to patient stretcher, administered medications, picked something off of floor, administered medication to patient, touched computer, touched patient monitor, touched patient ventilator/oxygen mask, touched patient, held ventilator/oxygen mask to patient face for several minutes while discontinuing patient sedation, placed mask on table, returned to supply cabinet and obtained supplies, returned to computer, touched computer, touched intravenous (IV) solutions hanging from IV pole, touched computer, at head of stretcher while staff #15 removed patient airway and applied oxygen mask, touched computer, touched patient, touched patient monitor, touched airway tubing, touched patient monitor, touched supplies. 12:55 PM - Patient wheeled out of OR by Staff #8 and #10 with same gloves worn while completing tasks at end of procedure. Staff #8 and #10 did not perform HH or don new gloves prior to exiting surgical suite. During an interview on the afternoon of 06/10/2025 with staff #19, #20, and #21, staff stated they (the facility) had “self-identified” issues with clinical staff not following proper hand hygiene policies and procedures. Staff #19, #20, and #21 verified that staff should be performing hand hygiene per their current policy. These same staff denied that their policies and/or procedures prohibited staff from wearing gloves in the halls. However, staff #19, #20, and #21 verified that staff should doff their gloves, perform hand hygiene, and don new gloves before exiting the surgical suite when taking a patient to the Post-Operative Care Unit (PACU). c.) Observations made on the morning of 6/10/25 in the facility’s Operating Room #2 back counter, revealed the following: (7) unused 10 cc syringes attached to intravenous pig tails (used to access and administer fluids and medications into an IV (intravenous) site; both the syringes and pigtails had previously been in separate sterile packaging. (4) unused 3 ml syringes attached to capped needles, both the syringes and the needles had been in sterile packaging. (8) unused 1 ml syringes attached to capped needles, both the syringes and the needles had been in sterile packaging. The supplies were not covered, to prevent contamination, were not on a sterile field, and had been in the room prior to the beginning of the current surgical case and were not used in the current surgical case. During an interview, on the morning of 6/10/25, in the facility’s operating room #2, when shown the opened supplies and asked if that was an acceptable facility practice, Staff #12, Infection Prevention Coordinator confirmed the finding and stated in part, “The supplies should be left in the sterile packaging.” Staff #12 removed the opened supplies.”

    Rule A0941. Standard-level. From a complaint.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Jun 11, 2025Complaint inspection4 deficiencies cited

How do patients fare?

  • CMS gives no overall : “Data are shown only for hospitals that participate in the Inpatient Quality Reporting (IQR) and Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) programs.”
  • CMS gives no : “Data are shown only for hospitals that participate in the Inpatient Quality Reporting (IQR) and Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) programs.”
Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Overall ratingCMS’s overall hospital quality star rating, 1 to 5Not rated
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the hospital’s patients (HCAHPS), 1 to 5Not rated

Is it certified, and in good standing?

  • Medicare-certified children’s hospital since May 7, 2024.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • CMS’s HAC Reduction Program file has no result for it: the program covers general acute care hospitals Medicare pays under its inpatient prospective payment system.
  • 4 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.
Source:

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

Who owns it?

  • 13 owners or officers are people: Martha Carnes (corporate director, 0%); Asharaf J Virani (corporate director, 0%); Suzanne Nimocks (corporate director, 0%); Debra Sukin (corporate officer, 0%); Debra Sukin (corporate director, 0%); Debra Sukin (runs it (operational or managerial control), 0%); Glen Gonzalez (corporate director, 0%); Weldon W Gage (corporate director, 0%); Afsheen Davis (corporate director, 0%); Brandy N Hebert (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Charles Park Shaper (corporate director, 0%); Tymothi Tombar (corporate director, 0%); Scott Wulfe (corporate director, 0%).
  • CMS’s Provider of Services file records no change 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.

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 9 hospitals CMS lists in Williamson County, 4 have an overall star rating from CMS: 2 rated 4 of 5, 2 rated 3 of 5.
  • CMS gives this hospital no overall star rating to compare.
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.

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.