A home health agency in Burleson, TX. It held 1 day of cash on hand (12th percentile of 5,525 home health agencies on liquidity, FY24 pool). On care, it carries a 1.5-star CMS quality rating and 4-star patient experience. Its within-stay preventable hospitalization runs 15.1%.
Quality of patient care star (1–5)
1.5★
Reported value2026
Source: CMS Care Compare
HHCAHPS patient-survey star (1–5)
4★
Reported value2026
Source: CMS HHCAHPS
Operating margin
Astrelis calculation unavailable
Within-stay preventable hospitalization
15.1%
Reported value2026
Source: CMS Care Compare
The money
$ thousands · HCRIS cost-report basis · as filed, QA-gated
Ratios tell you how this home health agency is doing. Statements tell you what kind of organization it is, and where the money comes from. Every figure below traces to a public cost-report filing, shown as filed. A ratio computes only when every input is reported in the filing (otherwise its cell states which input is Not reported in source); a year whose balance sheet does not reconcile is labeled, and its derived ratios read Astrelis calculation unavailable. Not audited by Astrelis.
Operating margin
Not reported in source
Operating income ÷ total operating revenue
Astrelis calculation · HCRIS WS G-3
Total margin
Not reported in source
Net income ÷ total revenue incl. nonoperating
Astrelis calculation · HCRIS WS G-3
Days cash on hand
1d (FY24)
Cash & investments ÷ daily operating expense
Astrelis calculation · HCRIS WS G / G-3
Current ratio
Not reported in source
Total current assets ÷ current liabilities
Astrelis calculation · HCRIS WS G
Equity financing ratio
-342% (FY24)
Total net assets ÷ total assets
Astrelis calculation · HCRIS WS G
Days in net patient A/R
Not reported in source
Net patient receivables ÷ (net patient revenue ÷ 365), same fiscal year
quality & operational context · CMS public reporting
The metrics this home health agency type is judged on: care quality, patient experience, and scale. Each is labeled by provenance class and public source; descriptive context only, never a ranking or adequacy claim. Provenance labels: Reported value is copied from the named public source; Astrelis calculation is a formula applied to unchanged reported inputs, with the formula shown; Illustrative estimate is a benchmark gap, multiplier, or scenario — never a measurement.
Quality of patient care star (1–5)
1.5★
Reported value2026
CMS Care Compare
HHCAHPS patient-survey star (1–5)
4★
Reported value2026
CMS HHCAHPS
Timely initiation of care
94.4%
Reported value2026
CMS Care Compare
Improvement in ambulation
76.7%
Reported value2026
CMS Care Compare
Improvement in dyspnea
70.0%
Reported value2026
CMS Care Compare
Within-stay preventable hospitalization
15.1%
Reported value2026
CMS Care Compare
Discharge to community
67.5%
Reported value2024
CMS HHVBP
Rated care 9–10 (% of patients)
90.0%
Reported value2026
CMS HHCAHPS
ZIP codes served
122
Reported value2026
CMS HH PUF
Total visits
52,255
Reported value2024
HCRIS CMS-1728
Total episodes
893
Reported value2024
HCRIS CMS-1728
Visits per episode
58.50
Astrelis calculation2024
Astrelis calculation — total visits ÷ total episodes, both reported above (HCRIS CMS-1728)
Unduplicated patients
2,091
Reported value2024
HCRIS CMS-1728
Cost per visit ($)
142.84
Reported value2024
HCRIS CMS-1728
Trajectory
Cost-report basis · 5 reporting years
Operating margin
Days cash on hand
The county this home health agency serves
Tarrant County, TX · metro, 1M+ population
Median household income
$81.8K
vs $82.1K US · $59.7K rural median
Poverty rate
10.7%
vs 12.5% US · 14.3% rural median
Uninsured
16.4%
vs 8.6% US · 8.4% rural median
Age 65+
14.0%
vs 16.8% US · 20.6% rural median
Fair or poor health
20.7%
self-reported, adults · CDC PLACES
Primary-care shortage
Not designated
HRSA HPSA
Economic context: 8.8% of county personal income is Medicare/Medicaid medical benefits; 20.3% arrives as government transfers (BEA, 2022).
Quality of patient care star (1–5)FY26Astrelis calculation
Quality of patient care star (1–5): 1.5 (2026).
The Board Briefing
What changed, what matters, and what your board should ask — every figure sourced to the public record.
A facility-specific dollar comparison cannot be calculated because a valid same-year peer pool was not reported. The report still includes all available facility measures, peer benchmarks, and a source-coverage inventory.
Report coverage: Limited Facility Benchmark. 11 of 14 facility measures available from public sources. The report covers the available measures against their peer benchmarks; measures the public record does not carry become findings. Coverage is disclosed here before you reserve, and thin data is never a decline reason. The refund guarantee stands: if we cannot deliver the published scope, you pay nothing.
The Board Briefing
Your facility and its world, board-ready. Measures the public record does not carry become findings, never a decline reason.
$1,000delivered within 2 business days of invoice
Reservation: invoice after coverage confirmation. No payment is collected on this site.
