Gracy Woods Nursing Center
A skilled nursing facility in Austin, TX. It ran an operating loss of 11.3% in FY25 on $7.3M of operating revenue. It held 14 days of cash on hand (60th percentile of 12,522 SNFs on liquidity, FY25 pool). Operating margin improved from -12.8% in FY20 to -11.3% in FY25. Including nonoperating items, the all-in result was positive at 4.4%. Its potentially-preventable readmissions runs 9.4%.
Where Gracy Woods Nursing sits among SNFs
Operating margin · FY25 pool · n = 12,880 of 13,649 filedEach point is one SNF in the national FY25 distribution for this provider type, placed by operating margin. Facilities are not matched on size, case mix, or market; that is the matched-peer comparison in the paid benchmark. The SNF FY25 median is +0.6%. Descriptive context only, not a ranking.
The money
$ thousands · HCRIS cost-report basis · as filed, QA-gatedRatios tell you how this skilled nursing facility 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.
| Line item | FY23 | FY24 | FY25 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patient revenue | 6,413 | 7,020 | 7,338 |
| Total operating revenue | 6,413 | 7,020 | 7,338 |
| Total operating expenses | 7,872 | 7,788 | 8,164 |
| Operating income | (1,459) | (769) | (826) |
| Operating margin % | -22.8% | -10.9% | -11.3% |
| Other non-operating, net | 1,320 | 1,060 | 1,202 |
| Net income | (139) | 291 | 376 |
| Net income % | -1.8% | +3.6% | +4.4% |
How it operates
quality & operational context · CMS public reportingThe metrics this skilled nursing facility 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.
Trajectory
The county this skilled nursing facility serves
-11.2% operating margin — 20th percentile of 12,880 peers (FY25 pool).
Operating margin declined 0.3 points vs FY24 — the briefing traces why, line by line.
Reserve The Board Briefing →A facility-specific dollar comparison cannot be calculated because a benchmark input was not reported. The report still includes all available facility measures, peer benchmarks, and a source-coverage inventory.
Reserve Performance Benchmark Report →How we calculated this
Operating margin vs its peer pool: FY25 pool · n = 12,880.
The Board Briefing
Your facility and its world, board-ready. Measures the public record does not carry become findings, never a decline reason.
SNF Performance Benchmark
Your facility against its matched peer cohort, every arithmetic benchmark difference dollarized against the cohort median.