Forest Hills Care And Rehabilitation Center
4300 West Houston, Broken Arrow, OK 74012 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 159 certified beds · (918) 254-5000 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (63%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 17% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
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
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
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.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 6.3% | 13.6% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.3% | 3.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.9% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 2.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 9.9% | 3.4% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.7% | 4.7% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.3% | 13.7% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.1% | 25.7% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.0% | 94.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.2% | 4.7% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 8.5% | 17.1% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.3% | 17.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.3% | 1.8% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 65.0% | 74.1% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.8% | 27.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.2% | 16.6% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.01 | 2.31 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.48 | 2.96 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
41.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 107 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 84.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 90 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 40% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 41.5%CMS range 31.2–49.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.6%CMS range 7.1–13.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 84.4% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 90.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 81.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 81.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 84.4% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 85.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.7% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 1.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.7%CMS range 3.1–9.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.30 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 159 beds and averages 144.9 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 14 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.00 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.28 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.72 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.46 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.22 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.33 to 0.17 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 63% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
35 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were developed for 2 (#80 and #108) of 20 sampled residents whose care plans were reviewed. The DON reported 140 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. On 04/29/25 at 2:37 p.m., Resident #80 was observed in bed. Resident #80's right hand was observed to be contracted. A facility policy titled Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plan, reviewed 10/23/19, read in part, Each resident will have a person-centered plan of care to identify problems, needs, strengths, preferences, and goals that will identify how the facility will provide care. An admission record, dated 06/20/24, showed Resident #80 had diagnoses which included kidney failure and dementia. A care plan, initiated 06/20/24, did not show interventions for the resident's contracted right hand. A significant change assessment, dated 04/09/25, showed Resident #80 had a BIMS summary score of 13 which was indicative of intact cognition. The assessment also showed Resident #80 was totally dependent on staff for care and…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-05-07 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure: a. range of motion services were provided for 2 (#97 and #75); and b. provide contracture interventions for 1 (#80) of 3 sampled residents who were reviewed for range of motion. The DON identified 12 residents with contractures and 43 residents with limited range of motion. Findings: 1. A policy titled Establishment of an Individual Restorative Program, dated 01/02/24, read in part, To provide treatment and services to maintain and improve functional abilities per physician order. A policy titled Range of Motion, dated 01/24/24, read in part, To exercise the resident's joints and muscles as required and/or clinically indicated. A Restorative Nursing Care Plan, dated 03/28/25, showed Resident #75 was to receive restorative services two to three times a week for eight weeks. A PT [Physical Therapy] Evaluation and Plan of Treatment, dated 04/18/25, read in part, Patient educated on initiation of RNP to maintain currently [sic] functional status. RNP to be established on this date. An OT [Occupational…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-05-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to: a. follow EBP during the provision of care for 1 (#108) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for catheter care; and b. ensure clean laundry was transported appropriately. The DON reported 11 residents had urinary catheters and 110 residents' laundry was cleaned by the facility. Findings: 1. On 05/05/25 at 3:45 p.m., LPN #3 was observed providing catheter care to Resident #108. LPN #3 was not observed to wear a gown. A facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, reviewed 05/15/24, read in part, The facility may expand the use of PPE [personal protective equipment] & refer to the use of gowns & gloves during high-contact resident care activities that provide opportunities for transfer of MDROs to hands/clothing. The use of gown & gloves for high-contact resident care activities is indicated, when contact precautions do not otherwise apply, for facility residents with wounds and/or indwelling medical devices regardless of MDRO colonization as well as for residents with colonization. An admission record,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-07 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were offered the pneumococcal immunization for 3 (#28, 83, and #330) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for immunizations. The DON identified 140 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A policy titled Pneumococcal Vaccine, dated 12/05/24, read in part, The opportunity to receive the Pneumococcal Vaccine will be extended to all Residents. The facility will provide pertinent information regarding the Risks/Benefits of receiving the Vaccine. 1. An undated face sheet showed Resident #330 had a diagnosis of diabetes. Review of the immunization tab in the electronic clinical record did not show the resident had been offered the pneumococcal immunization. 2. A significant change assessment, dated 02/14/25, showed Resident #83 had a diagnosis of a stroke and the pneumococcal immunization was up to date. Review of the immunization tab in the electronic clinical record did not show when the resident had received the pneumococcal immunization or that the facility had offered the immunization. 3. A quarterly…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-07 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure injuries of unknown origin were reported to the Oklahoma State Department of Health as required for 1 (#80) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The DON reported 140 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A facility policy titled Abuse Prevention, revised 10/21/23, read in part, Alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of an unknown source and misappropriation of a residents property are reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury. If the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, are reported immediately, but not later than 24 hours after the allegation is made, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including State Survey Agency, and local law enforcement as required). An admission record, dated 06/20/24, showed Resident #80 had diagnoses which included kidney…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-07 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure injuries of unknown origin were thoroughly investigated for 1 (#80) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The DON reported 140 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A facility policy titled Abuse Prevention, revised 10/21/23, read in part, The facility will initiate at the time of any finding of potential abuse or neglect an investigation to determine cause and effect, and to provide protection to any alleged victims to prevent harm during the continuance of an investigation. An admission record, dated 06/20/24, showed Resident #80 had diagnoses which included kidney failure and dementia. A nurse note, dated 03/02/25 at 2:29 p.m., showed Resident #80's family informed the nurse that the resident's shoulder was hurting. The note showed an assessment was completed and that swelling and warmth to the left shoulder were noted, and an x-ray of the left shoulder was ordered. A nurse note, dated 03/02/25 at 9:12 p.m., read in part, Results from shoulder x-ray received and are positive for left shoulder…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide ADL care for 1 (#3) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for ADL care. The DON identified 27 residents were dependent of staff for nail care. Findings: On 04/27/25 at 9:05 a.m., Resident #3 was observed lying in bed. The resident's toenails were observed to be long and unkempt. A facility policy titled Nail Care, reviewed 07/21/22, read in part, The purpose of nail care is to clean the nail bed, trim nails, and prevent infection. A significant change assessment, dated 03/06/25, showed Resident #3 had a BIMS summary score of 14 which was indicative of intact cognition, and they required substantial assistance from staff. A Skin Monitoring CNA Bathing Review form, dated 04/16/25, showed the resident's toenails needed to be trimmed. On 04/27/25 at 9:11 a.m., Resident #3 stated since they went off hospice no one was trimming their toenails. They also stated their toenails were so long they were uncomfortable. On 04/28/25 at 2:15 p.m., CNA #1 stated CNAs were supposed to provide nail care to residents on their…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were secure for 1 (500 hall medication/treatment cart) of 2 medication/treatment carts observed on the 500 hall. The DON identified 15 medication/treatment carts in the facility. Findings: On 04/29/25 at 11:50 a.m., the 500 hall medication/treatment cart was observed to be unlocked and unattended on the 500 hall across from the restrooms. On 04/29/25 at 11:54 a.m., the administrator locked the 500 hall medication/treatment cart as they walked by and stated they needed to find out who was assigned to the medication/treatment cart. On 04/29/25 at 11:57 a.m., LPN #5 stated they should have locked the cart, but had forgotten. On 05/07/25 at 10:38 a.m., the DON stated medication/treatment carts were to remain locked when left unattended. They stated they monitored medication/treatment carts to ensure they were locked when unattended. They stated it was a constant battle.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-07 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was offered the COVID-19 vaccination for 1 (#83) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for the COVID-19 vaccination. The DON identified 140 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A policy titled Covid Vaccine, dated 09/04/24, read in part, The Facility will offer the COVID Vaccine to Employees/Residents to assist in mitigating the spreads [sic] of COVID-19. A significant change assessment, dated 02/14/25, showed Resident #83 had a diagnosis of a stroke and the COVID-19 vaccination was not up to date. Review of the immunization tab in the electronic clinical record did not show when the resident had been offered or received the COVID-19 vaccination. On 05/07/25 at 1:04 p.m., the DON stated Resident #83 must have been out of the facility when they had offered the COVID-19 vaccination during a COVID clinic. The DON stated, We must have missed it.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were labeled and not expired for three (200 hall treatment cart, 600 hall treatment cart, and 500 hall medication cart) of seven medication/treatment carts observed. The DON identified 13 medication/treatment carts in the facility. Findings: 1. On 02/05/24 at 7:38 a.m., the medication/treatment cart for 400 hall was observed to be unlocked and unattended. On 02/05/24 at 7:40 a.m., LPN #3 was observed to lock the medication/treatment cart. On 02/05/24 at 7:40 a.m., the medication/treatment cart for the 300 hall was observed to be unlocked and unattended. The cart was observed to have a bottle of wound cleanser sitting on the top. On 02/05/24 at 7:51 a.m., LPN #4 stated the medication/treatment cart did not belong to them and left without locking the cart. On 02/05/24 at 7:54 a.m., LPN #4 approached the medication/treatment cart, placed the bottle of wound cleanser inside, and left the cart unlocked and unattended. On 02/05/24 at 7:55 a.m., LPN #4 walked by the medication/treatment cart and locked it. On…
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.
Show the remaining 25 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-09 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
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 ensure food was provided to residents in a manner required for their needs to prevent choking. Cook #1 stated five residents received pureed diets from the kitchen. Findings: On 02/05/24 at 10:51 a.m., cook #1 was observed to prepare pureed food. [NAME] #1 stated the facility had five residents who required pureed food. The cook had placed six to seven hamburger patties in the blender, along with water, thickener and a calorie/protein powder supplement. Upon completion of the puree, the puree was tasted. The food was grainy and without flavor. On 02/05/24 at 11:04 a.m., cook #1 was observed to pour peas and carrots, two scoops of thickener and one scoop of calorie/protein powder supplement into the bowl of the blender for puree. The skins of the peas were observed to be throughout the mixture and not smooth. A test sample was taken with a plastic spoon and provided to the surveyor. The puree was not smooth. [NAME] #1 was asked if there were anything that could cause a resident to choke. They stated no. On…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-09 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate code status for one (#55) of four sampled residents who were reviewed for advance directives. The administrator identified 127 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: Resident #55 had diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A signed DNR, dated 08/10/17, was in the scanned documents in the electronic clinical record. A signed DNR, dated 11/28/17, was in the scanned documents in the electronic clinical record. An Advance Directive Acknowledgement Form, dated 12/15/23, documented Resident #55 did not have an advanced directive. The Care Plan, dated 12/28/23, documented Resident #55 was a full code. The demographic banner, face sheet, and active physician orders in the electronic clinical record documented Resident #55 was a full code. On 02/07/24 at 1:01 p.m., the DON stated Resident #55 was a full code. They stated the signed DNR was from a previous admission to the facility but was still in the active electronic clinical record for Resident #55.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-09 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident representatives were notified of changes in condition for one (#89) of one sampled resident who was reviewed for notification of change. The administrator identified 127 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: The Notification of a Change in Condition policy, dated 04/26/23, read in parts, .the Resident Representative will be notified of a Change in a Resident's Condition .Document in the Interdisciplinary Team [IDT] Notes .Resident Change in Condition . Resident #89 had diagnoses which included congestive heart failure. A facility incident report, dated 12/14/23, documented the resident fell. The incident report or nurse progress notes did not document the resident's POA had been notified. A nurse progress note, dated 12/29/23, documented the resident returned from a hospital visit. The note did not document the resident's POA had been notified of the resident's return. A nurse progress note, dated 01/10/24, documented the resident returned from a hospital visit. The note did not document the POA…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-09 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications and weights documented in the MDS were accurate for one (#68) of 25 sampled residents who were reviewed for MDS accuracy. The administrator identified 127 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A facility MDS 3.0 policy, dated 04/25/19, read in part .the MDS Coordinator, in conjunction with the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT), expected to complete assessments using the MDS 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) specified by the state in compliance with the MDS 3.0 RAI user's manual guidelines . Resident #68 had diagnoses which included psychotic disorder with hallucinations. a. An Order Summary report, dated 08/23/23, documented Resident #68 received Nuplazid (anti-psychotic medication) at bedtime. A MAR, dated November 2023, documented Resident #68 received Nuplazid. A Quarterly Assessment, dated 11/29/23, documented the resident did not receive antipsychotic medications since the prior assessment. On 02/29/24 at 12:24 p.m., the MDS coordinator stated medications were coded by drug classification.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-09 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan was completed within 48 hours for one (#120) of one sampled resident reviewed for baseline care plan. The administrator identified 127 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plan policy, dated 01/23/19, read in part .POLICY: Each resident will have a person centered plan of care to identify problems, needs, strengths, preferences, and goals that will identify how the interdisciplinary team will provide care . A Baseline Care Plan is to be developed within 48 hours. Develop initial goals based upon admission orders/resident's input and is recorded on the Baseline Care Plan . Resident #120 admitted with diagnoses which included muscle weakness, cognitive communication deficit, need for assistance with personal care, decreased white blood cell, soft tissue disorder, cellulitis to right upper limb, and encounter for other orthopedic aftercare. A Care Plan, dated 11/15/23, only documented an activity focus area. There was no other care plan located 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure showers were provided for one (#172) of seven sampled residents reviewed for bathing. The administrator reported 127 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Resident #172 had diagnoses which included Parkinson's disease. Resident #172's shower documentation did not document the resident had been offered a shower between January 31, 2024 and February 09, 2024. On 02/09/24 at 1:45 p.m., Resident #172 stated they had not received a shower in several days, but would like to at least have a bed bath. On 02/09/24 at 2:00 p.m., CNA #1 stated they did not have time to give Resident #172 a shower on 02/06/24 or 02/09/24. They stated they reported it to the nurse and the oncoming shift to see if they had time to give showers.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure chemicals were secured for one (300 hall) of five halls observed for storage of chemicals. The Resident Listing Report, dated 02/05/24, documented 14 residents resided on the 300 hall. Findings: On 02/05/24 at 8:26 a.m., an unlabeled closet was observed to be unlocked. The door was observed to have a key pad lock but the inside latch of the lock was taped so it remained unlocked. The following chemicals were observed unsecured in the unlocked closet: a. Three and one half-one quart bottles of floor cleaner. The label on the bottle documented the product caused serious burns. b. One-one quart bottle of spot shot professional stain remover. The label documented to keep out of reach of children. c. One-one quart bottle of red juice stain remover that was approximately half full. The label documented it may cause irritation to the mouth, throat, and stomach and to use splash goggles and gloves during use. d. One-one quart glass cleaner. The label documented to keep out of reach of children. On 02/05/24 at 8:49 a.m., 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-09 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure controlled medications were reconciled for one (500 hall) medication cart of seven medication/treatment carts observed. The administrator identified 127 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: The Controlled Substances Count Shift Verification form, dated February 2024, documented a shift count verification of controlled substances had been completed 12 times out of 22 opportunities from 02/01/24 through 02/08/24 at 6:00 a.m. The form did not document any on-coming nurse/CMA signatures, no entries for 02/03/24 or 02/09/24 were documented, and no entries were documented for the 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. shift. On 02/08/24 at 12:02 p.m., the 500 hall medication cart was observed with CMA #1. The locked narcotic box was observed to contain a card of Cephalexin 500 mg for Resident #65. The card of Cephalexin was observed to have nine capsules remaining. The count sheet for the Cephalexin 500 mg documented CMA #1 administered one pill at 7:36 a.m. on 02/08/24 and there were ten capsules remaining.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-09 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food contained nutritive value, was palatable, and served at preferred temperatures. The Resident Matrix provided by the facility on 02/05/24, documented 125 residents received food from the kitchen. Findings: On 02/05/24 at 9:51 a.m., Resident #83 stated the food was very cold. On 02/05/24 at 10:07 a.m., Resident #48 stated the food was not palatable. On 02/05/24 at 10:17 a.m., Resident #185 stated they wanted a decent breakfast. They stated staff bring eggs and oatmeal and they do not eat eggs, and oatmeal makes them gag. They stated this happened all weekend. Resident #185 stated lunch and dinner were usually good and if not, they requested a burger. On 02/05/24 at 10:39 a.m., Resident #55 stated the food temperature was inconsistent. They stated they ate in their room because it took too long to be served in the dining room. On 02/05/24 at 10:51 a.m., [NAME] #1 was observed to prepare pureed food. [NAME] #1 stated the facility had four or five residents who required pureed food. The cook had placed…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary environment, provide food and drink at safe temperatures The Resident Matrix provided by the facility on 02/05/24, documented 125 residents received food from the kitchen. Findings: On 02/05/24 at 10:50 a.m., during the kitchen observation, several male staff members were observed to not wear beard nets or hair nets while preparing food. On 02/05/24 at 10:52 a.m, the dietitian was asked what length of hair growth would require a hair net. The dietitian stated they would expect the staff to wear hair nets at any stage of hair growth.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-13 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure as needed narcotic pain medication was available for two (#4 and #6) of four sampled residents were reviewed for access to pain medication. The DON identified 83 residents with orders for narcotic pain medication. Findings: 1. Resident #4 had diagnoses which included pain, dorsalgia, and discitis of the thoracolumbar region. The physician's order note, dated 08/03/23 at 11:10 a.m., documented the resident was to receive oxycodone-acetaminophen 10-325 mg, one tablet every four hours as needed for pain. The pain assessment, dated 08/03/23 at 4:06 p.m., documented the resident rated their pain at nine out of ten. The progress note, dated 08/03/23 at 4:20 p.m., documented the resident requested oxycodone for pain. The pharmacy shipping log documented the oxycodone-acetaminophen 10-325 mg was filled and shipped on 08/04/23 at 5:29 p.m. The narcotic record documented the resident received their first dose of oxycodone-acetaminophen 10-325 mg on 08/05/23 at 8:15 a.m. On 10/13/23 at 12:00 p.m., LPN #2 stated when they…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-04-25 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure: a. residents were offered the choice to formulate advance directives for six (#4, 5, 15, 22, 61, and #85), and b. a code status form was valid for one (#87) of seven sampled residents reviewed for advance directives. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 04/24/23, documented 108 residents resided in the facility. It documented 42 residents who had advance directives. Findings: 1. Res #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. There was no documentation the resident and/or their representative was offered the choice to formulate an advance directive. On 04/18/23 at 4:04 p.m., the administrator and corporate nurse consultant #1 were asked to provide documentation the resident and/or their representative was offered the choice to formulate an advance directive. On 04/19/23 at 10:01 a.m., the regional director stated they found the problem with the advance directives on 08/25/22. They stated they corrected the problem by…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-04-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement care plans related to the residents' pain for two (#31 and #33) of 27 sampled residents whose care plans were reviewed. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 04/24/23, documented 108 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Res #31 had diagnoses which included polyosteoarthritis and Alzheimer's disease. A physician order, dated 10/15/22, documented to administer Tylenol 325 mg every six hours as needed for pain. A quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], documented the resident was moderately cognitively impaired, required limited assistance with ADLs, and received as needed pain medications during the review period. A care plan, reviewed 02/07/23, did not document a care plan related to pain. On 04/18/23 at 12:59 p.m., Res #31 was observed in bed in their room. The resident was overheard asking a CMA for pain medication. The CMA was heard stating Tylenol had already been given but the nurse would be…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-04-25 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received showers for three (#62, 108, and #111) of four sampled residents reviewed for ADLs. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 04/24/23, documented 108 residents required assistance with bathing. Findings: 1. Res #111 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of atrioventricular block, hypertension, and convulsions. The ADL log for June 2022 was reviewed and documented the resident received one shower. On 04/24/23 at 3:30 p.m., the DON and corporate nurse reported the resident's showers were performed by Hospice and they will call and see if they can get the records. On 04/25/23 at 10:51 a.m., the DON reported the resident only had a referral for hospice and was never admitted to hospice. The DON was asked to review the ADL log for the resident for June 2022 and was asked if the resident had more than one bath for the month. The DON stated it wasn't documented. 2. Res #62 had…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-04-25 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure: a. weights were obtained as ordered, b. the physician was notified of a significant weight loss, and c. food intake was monitored and recorded for one (#61) of one sampled resident reviewed for nutrition. The Resident Census and Condition of Residents report, dated 04/24/23, documented 108 resided in the facility. Findings: Res #61 had diagnoses which included GERD, muscle wasting and atrophy, dysphasia following cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, and cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of right anterior cerebral artery. A care plan problem, initiated on 09/10/19, documented the resident had a PEG tube and received tube feedings. It was documented to monitor, record, and report to the physician a significant weight loss of greater then 5% in one month. A care plan problem, initiated on 10/02/19, documented the resident was able to eat by mouth. It was documented to provide and serve diet as ordered. It was documented…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-04-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered by the physician for two (#22, 24 and #109) of six sampled residents reviewed for medications. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 04/24/23, documented 108 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Res #109 had diagnoses which included bacteremia and ESBL infection. A physician order, dated 10/04/22, documented to administer meropenem sodium chloride solution reconstituted (an antibiotic) 1 gm/50 ml. Use 1 gram intravenously every eight hours for 45 days. The order was discontinued on 11/19/22. A physician order, dated 10/04/22, documented to administer vancomycin HCl solution (an antibiotic). Use 500 mg intravenously every eight hours for 45 days. The order was discontinued on 10/08/22. A physician order, dated 10/08/22, documented to administer vancomycin HCl solution. Use 500 mg intravenously three times a day for 45 days. The order was discontinued on 10/21/22. A…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-04-25 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents' physician addressed irregularities documented on the MRR per facility policy for four (#5, 10, 22 and #24) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. A facility drug regimen review policy documented the physician was to provide a written response to the report within one month after the report was sent, and the facility must maintain copies of the reports for one year. 1. Res #22 had diagnoses which included recurrent depressive disorders, schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, hypertension, and hypothyroidism. A physician order, dated 06/04/21, documented to administer cetirizine 10 mg at bedtime for seasonal allergies. A physician order, dated 09/22/21, documented to administer chlorpromazine 300 mg at bedtime for schizoaffective disorder bipolar type. A physician order, dated 12/08/21, documented to administer mirtazapine 15 mg at bedtime related to recurrent depressive disorders. A physician order, dated 01/25/22,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-04-25 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to: a. offer the influenza vaccination to each resident annually for three (#3, 10, and #77) and b. offer the pneumococcal immunization for four (#3, 5, 62 and #77) of five sampled residents reviewed for influenza and pneumococcal immunizations. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 04/24/23, documented 108 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A facility influenza vaccine policy, dated 04/28/22, documented residents would be offered the influenza vaccine during October 1 through March 31 on an annual basis and administration would be documented in the EHR. A facility pneumococcal vaccine policy, dated 04/28/22, documented residents would be offered the pneumococcal vaccine upon admission in accordance with CDC guidelines and administration would be documented in the EHR. 1. Res #3 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The EHR did not document the influenza was offered or declined in 2022. The record did not document 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-25 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the resident's legal representative of a significant weight loss for one (#61) of one sampled resident reviewed for change in condition. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 04/24/23, documented 108 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Res #61 had diagnoses which included GERD, muscle wasting and atrophy, dysphasia following cerebral infarction, and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side. A weight report, dated 03/08/2023, documented the resident weighed 153.8 lbs. A weight report, dated 04/12/2023, documented the resident weighed 145.8 pounds which was a 5.20% weight loss in five weeks. There was no documentation the resident's legal representative was notified of the significant weight loss. On 04/25/23 at 12:23 p.m., the DON was asked the the resident's legal representative was notified of their significant weight loss. They stated the resident's representative was always at the facility and notified. They were asked if there was any…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-25 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure MDS assessments were coded accurately for two (#107 and #5) of 32 sampled residents whose medical records were reviewed. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 04/18/23, documented 108 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Res #107 had diagnoses which included metabolic encephalopathy, asthma, and cerebral infarction. A physician's order, dated 01/30/23, documented to discharge resident home today per family request. A discharge summary note, dated 01/30/23 at 5:00 p.m., documented per physician orders the resident was discharged home will all their medications, belongings and discharge paperwork. The note documented no signs or symptoms of issues or complaints noted at time of discharge. A discharge-return not anticipated assessment, dated 01/30/23 at 5:50 p.m., documented the resident was discharged to an acute care hospital. On 04/25/23 at 10:36 a.m., the MDS Coordinator #2 stated the discharge MDS assessment…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-25 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete a significant change MDS for a resident started on hospice for one (#77) of two sampled residents reviewed for hospitalization. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 04/24/23, documented 108 residents resided in the facility. Findings: The Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual Version 1.17.1, dated October 2019, documented in parts .An SCSA is required to be performed when a terminally ill resident enrolls in a hospice program .The ARD must be within 14 days from the effective date of the hospice election . Res #77 had diagnoses which included transient cerebral ischemic attack, Parkinson's disease, and acute kidney failure. A physician order, dated 03/22/23, documented to evaluate Res #77 for admission to hospice services. A hospice contract documented start of services for Res #77 as 03/23/23. On 03/28/23, a discharge return anticipated MDS was completed. On 04/02/23, an entry record MDS was completed. There was no significant change MDS assessment…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-25 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to incorporate the from the PASARR level II determination and the PASARR evaluation report into a resident's care plan for one (#77) of three sampled residents reviewed for PASARR's. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 04/24/23, documented 24 residents required behavioral health services. Findings: Res #77 had diagnoses which included paranoid schizophrenia and generalized anxiety disorder. A Nursing Facility Level of Care Assessment (PASARR level I), dated 12/05/22, documented Res #77 did not require a level II assessment because the resident was projected to reside in the facility less than 30 days. A care plan, reviewed 04/03/23, did not document a level II evaluation was completed or specialty care required for mental health diagnoses. On 04/19/23 at 11:51 a.m., MDS Coordinator #1 stated residents who originally had a 30 day waiver for level II PASARR assessment must have a level II completed when the facility determined the resident would stay longer than 30 days. They stated she was unsure if Res…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-25 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to accurately complete a preadmission screening for individuals with a mental disorder for one (#101) of three sampled residents reviewed for PASARR's. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 04/24/23, documented 24 residents required behavioral health services. Findings: Res #101 had diagnoses which included bipolar disorder. A Nursing Facility Level of Care Assessment (PASARR Level I), dated 03/03/23, documented the resident did not have a diagnosis of a serious mental illness. On 04/19/23 at 11:45 a.m., MDS Coordinator #1 stated Res #101's diagnosis of bipolar disorder should have been included on the level I assessment but was not.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-25 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to review and revise a care plan after significant change for one (#33) of 27 sampled residents whose care plans were reviewed. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 04/24/23, documented 108 residents resided in the facility. Findings: The Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual Version 1.17.1, dated October 2019, documented in parts .The care plan completion date .must be either later than or the same date as the CAA completion date ., but no later than 7 calendar days after the CAA completion date . Res #33 had diagnoses which included chronic respiratory failure, COPD, and dementia. A physician order, dated 02/21/23, documented to start hospice services. A significant change MDS, dated [DATE], documented the resident received hospice services and had a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectance of less than six months. The care area assessment of the MDS was signed as…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a 2 liter fluid restriction per day had been conducted for one (#73) of one sampled resident whose medical record was reviewed. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 04/18/23, documented 108 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Res #73 had diagnoses which included dysphagia following cerebrovascular accident, chronic kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, and acute combined systolic and diastolic congestive heart failure. An admission assessment, dated 03/31/23, documented the resident had moderately impaired cognition and required one person supervision with eating and drinking. A physician order, dated 04/07/23, documented a 2 liter fluid restriction per day related to heart failure. A care plan, dated 04/10/23, documented fluid overload or potential fluid volume overload related to kidney failure/chronic kidney disease with an intervention of a 2 liter fluid restriction daily. There was no daily amount of fluid intake documented in the medical record since 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to MGM HEALTHCARE — 27 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
The other 26 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.3★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OKLAHOMA ACQUISITIONS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 63% | since 12/31/2019 |
| BETTIS, MELISSA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 04/18/2022 |
| BIENSTOCK, JUDAH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 03/01/2013 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OK
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Oklahoma Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 375392. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-07, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.