Oak Grove Retirement Home

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Staffing

CMS has not published payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours for this facility yet — this can happen for newer, hospital-based, or recently-certified homes. It can also mean the home simply did not file, which CMS does not distinguish in this data, so treat the gap as unexplained rather than benign. Staffing is one of the three parts of the CMS star rating; where it’s missing, weigh the independent health-inspection score most, and ask the facility directly about its nurse-to-resident ratios and weekend RN coverage.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

• Potential for harm · E2025-11-13 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — pattern
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure proper positioning for (Resident #14) and failed to provide range of motion (ROM) services for Resident #25 to prevent further decline in physical functioning. This deficient practice was identified for two (2) of three (3) residents reviewed for ROM and positioning. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Mobility and Range of Motion, last reviewed January 2024, revealed: Policy Statement: Residents with limited range of motion (ROM) will receive treatment and services to increase and/or prevent further decrease in ROM. Residents with limited mobility will receive appropriate services, equipment, and assistance to maintain or improve mobility. Resident #14 An observation on 11/11/2025 at 12:55 PM and again on 11/12/2025 at 9:25 AM, and 11:05 AM revealed Resident #14 sitting in a wheelchair, leaning to the right with her right arm resting on the top of the wheel. The wheelchair did not have a right-side armrest in place to support her positioning. An…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-13 · tag F0606 — failed to not employ staff found guilty of abuse — isolated
  Not hire anyone with a finding of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or theft.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that pre-employment background checks were completed prior to allowing newly hired direct care staff to work for two (2) of five (5) employee files reviewed, Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) #3 and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #4 Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, last reviewed 1/2024, revealed: The facility has developed policies and procedures which provide essential components to an abuse prevention and intervention program. The program encompasses the following components: 1.) Screening of potential hires: criminal background checks. Review of the Employee Handbook dated March 2021 revealed under Background Check: All new hires of the facility are required to undergo a criminal background check. Review of CNA #3's personnel record and time sheets revealed she was hired on 10/6/25 with no background check and had been allowed to work 21 days between 10/7/25-11/12/25. Review of LPN #4's personnel record and time sheets revealed…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-13 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS)Assessment related to coding a resident as having a serious mental illness for one (1) of 17 resident MDS assessments reviewed. Resident #3.Findings Include: Review of the Facility Policy titled, Coordination/Certification of Assessments with reviewed date of 01/2024 revealed, Each resident's assessment will be coordinated by and certified as complete by a Registered Nurse, and all individuals who complete a portion of the assessment will sign and certify the accuracy of the portion of the assessment he or she completed Record review of Resident #3's admission Record revealed an initial admission date of 01/11/2019 with medical diagnoses that included Unspecified Mood (Affective) Disorder and Psychotic Disorder with Delusions Due To Known Physiological Condition. Record review of Resident #3's Annual MDS assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/20/25 revealed under Section A1500t that he was not currently considered by the state level II PASRR (Preadmission…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, staff interviews, and record review the facility failed to develop a care plan related to contractures for Resident #25 and failed to implement a care plan related to nail care for Resident #29 for (2) two of 23 sampled resident care plans reviewed. Resident #25 and 29Findings include: Review of typed statement on facility letterhead revealed Proper Name retirement home follows the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) manual as a policy for initiating, completing, and updating of the care plan. Resident #25 An observation of Resident #25 on 11/11/25 at 12:00 PM and again on 11/12/25 at 9:00AM and 1:00PM revealed a right-hand contracture with no device in place for positioning or protection. An interview with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse on 11/13/25 at 9:30 AM confirmed there was no care plan developed addressing Resident #25's right-hand contracture or ROM needs. She stated the care plan should identify resident-specific needs and guide staff on the interventions required, and that failing to develop a care plan for a resident's need could result in the…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide ADL (Activities of Daily Living) care related to fingernail hygiene for 1 (one) of 56 residents residing in the facility. Resident #29.Findings Include: Review of the typed statement on facility letterhead by the Administrator (ADM)revealed, Proper Name (facility) follows the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) manual for the Activities of Daily Living policy. Observations on 11/11/25 at 1:00 PM and on 11/12/25 at 1:50 PM revealed Resident #29 with long, dirty fingernails. His fingernails on both hands were approximately one-fourth to one-half an inch long and they had brown substance underneath. During an observation and interview on 11/12/25 at 1:55 PM with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1, she confirmed that Resident #29 had long fingernails with a brown substance underneath. She stated that unkept fingernails could cause the spread of germs and infection if he scratched himself. CNA #1 revealed that Resident #29's scheduled shower days were Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays and that his…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

Fines & penalties

$16,195 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $8,097 — penalty dated 2024-07-30
• $8,098 — penalty dated 2024-07-30

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

What families pay in MS