Search for Skilled Nursing by ZIP Code:  :

Grace Presbyterian Village

  1. Skilled Nursing Home Facilities
  2. Texas
  3. Dallas Skilled Nursing Home Facilities
Full Name

Phone Number

Email Address

City of interest
We value your privacy. By submitting this form, you agree to the terms and conditions of our privacy policy and our Agreement to be Contacted by Telephone. You also consent that we can reach out to you using automated calling technology. Your consent is not required to use our service.

Photos

Reviews
Overall Rating 3.8 / 5.0 ★★★★★

  • Pam Smith
    ★★★★★ 6 months ago

    My mom recently spent several weeks here after a major surgery. The staff was professional, kind and courteous. The facility was very clean. She was given physical therapy several times a day and got her strength back. She said the food was good. They took very good care of her.

  • Yancy Johnson
    ★★★★★ 9 months ago

    I worked at grace for three year's i really loved my resident's and they loved me i got fired for no reason i was never late no write ups a hard and faithful worker. I tried to come back for rehire but was told i couldn't comeback i love this place it was my second home i worked alot of doubles i wish i could come back :(

  • Lovely Monet
    ★★★★★ a year ago

    Do not take your family here . Although there are some awesome nurses who i wished would take their skills else where this place has only gone down hill . They are shady with there own employees unless you're a top dog . Turnover rate is super high that right there speaks volumes so sad such a beautiful place to work . It's just shady. Did y'all at least get rid of the bed bugs ?

  • Steve Erickson
    ★★★★★ 2 years ago

    My wife's parents moved here from another facility and the nursing care here is far superior to the previous facility. My brother-in-law's parents are here and now my own mother is here as well. In all of our visits, GPV staff are all gracious and personable, from the doctors to the maintenance folks. On site doctors, nurses, occupational and memory therapists, and even a pastor eliminate the need for constant trips outside the facility. And multiple levels of care, from independent living, assisted living, nursing, and memory care, assure we do not have to move our relatives from facility to facility as needs change. This place has been a Godsend.

  • Rosalinda Moreno
    ★★★★★ a year ago

    I work at this facility as a massage therapist. I love this place since day one. I've been working here for 4 1/2 yrs.I love the atmosphere here. I do recommend this place to work or to live here.

About Grace Presbyterian Village

General Information

Legal Business NameGrace Presbyterian Ministries, Inc.
Ownership TypeNon Profit - Other
Changed Ownership In The Last 12 MonthsNo
First Accepted MedicareMay 8, 1996 (23 years)
Capacity160
Residents133
Percent Occupied83%
Program ParticipationMedicare And Medicaid
Resident And Family CouncilsResident
In HospitalNo
Continuing Care Retirement CommunityYes
Special Focus FacilityNo
Auto Sprinkler System In Required AreasYes

Ratings for Grace Presbyterian Village

Grace Presbyterian Village was reviewed by Medicare to have a rating of 4 out of 5 stars.

About Medicare Ratings
Overall Rating
Health Inspections Rating
Quality Measures Rating
Staff Rating
RN Staff Rating

Overall Ratings of Texas Nursing Homes

Fines, Complaints, and Inspection Problems in the Past 3 Years

Compare The Number of Problems

Types of Problems at Nursing Homes

Some issues within a nursing home are much more severe than others. Medicare evaluates each problem based on 2 scales: the number of residents affected by a problem and the severity of the potential or actual harm to residents based on the problem. We have color coded the matrix below to make it easier to pick out the more severe problems. In general, orange and red issues related to the treatment of a resident are considered substandard quality of care.

  Residents Affected
Severity of the Deficiency Few Some Many
Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety J K L
Actual harm that is not immediate jeopardy G H I
No actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy D E F
No actual harm with potential for minimal harm A B C

June 28, 2017 - 2 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
ESomePotential for HarmComplaintDevelop and implement policies for 1) screening and training employees; and the 2) prevention, identification, investigation, and reporting of any abuse, neglect, mistreatment and misappropriation of property.

February 10, 2017 - 2 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
ESomePotential for HarmHealth InspectionMaintain drug records and properly mark/label drugs and other similar products according to accepted professional standards.
ESomePotential for HarmHealth InspectionEnsure that each resident who enters the nursing home without a catheter is not given a catheter, unless medically necessary, and that incontinent patients receive proper services to prevent urinary tract infections and restore normal bladder functions.
ESomePotential for HarmHealth InspectionProvide care for residents in a way that maintains or improves their dignity and respect in full recognition of their individuality.

Staffing Levels Per Resident per Day

Medicare determines the expected staffing time per resident per day depending on level of care the residents of Grace Presbyterian Village require. It is important to compare the reported time to expected time for a single facility instead of comparing the amount of time per resident of two facilities. Learn why.

2hr 45min
2hr 25min
ReportedExpected
CNA
1hr 15min
40min
ReportedExpected
LPN
50min
1hr 15min
ReportedExpected
RN
4hr 50min
4hr 20min
ReportedExpected
Total Nursing

This facility also provides approximately 1hr 45min per resident per WEEK of physical therapist time.

Quality Measures for Long Stay Residents

100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
93.1%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
97.4%
95.6%
97.9%
100.0%
92.0%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
65.2%
53.8%
72.7%
87.2%
49.5%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
19.4%
18.4%
15.0%
17.9%
25.9%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antianxiety or hypnotic medication
18.7%
33.9%
28.5%
28.6%
20.7%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
25.3%
23.9%
24.7%
20.7%
16.8%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
21.7%
20.6%
30.8%
21.4%
18.7%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
3.9%
5.6%
4.9%
8.9%
5.8%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
3.4%
1.4%
2.7%
9.7%
6.2%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of high risk long-stay residents with pressure ulcers
5.7%
4.3%
6.4%
3.8%
4.8%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
0.0%
2.3%
2.2%
1.2%
3.8%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
1.3%
2.2%
5.3%
2.2%
3.4%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
1.3%
1.1%
3.2%
2.2%
3.5%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
3.0%
0.8%
1.7%
0.8%
1.9%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of long-stay residents who were physically restrained

Quality Measures for Short Stay Residents

93.4%
89.2%
91.4%
93.9%
78.7%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
89.5%
77.8%
78.0%
78.0%
75.4%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of short-stay residents who were assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
63.4%
62.9%
65.7%
67.5%
60.0%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of short-stay residents who made improvements in function
13.6%
14.2%
10.7%
15.6%
11.5%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of short-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
1.1%
1.1%
0.8%
0.4%
2.7%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.8%
0.6%
0.3%
0.0%
0.8%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017TX
Percentage of short-stay residents with pressure ulcers that are new or worsened



Some page content retrieved from Google Places