Senior Suites Healthcare
3501 W Washington Street, Broken Arrow, OK 74012 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 92 certified beds · (918) 250-5405 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567, F0570)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (31) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 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 fell from 3 to 1 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 | 5.8% | 13.6% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.1% | 3.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.1% | 1.9% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 2.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 3.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.2% | 4.7% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.5% | 13.7% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 18.2% | 25.7% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.7% | 94.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.0% | 4.7% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.7% | 17.1% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.4% | 17.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.5% | 1.8% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 84.4% | 74.1% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 16.6% | 27.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 34.9% | 16.6% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.39 | 2.31 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.39 | 2.96 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
53.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 36 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.15 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 13% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 53.9%CMS range 39.7–69.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.5%CMS range 5.9–14.6 | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.5%CMS range 3.5–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.94 | 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 92 beds and averages 75.3 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 17 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.36 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.30 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.49 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 2.63 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.66 on weekdays — 28% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.31 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.
31 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-02-12 · tag F0636 — patternAssess 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments were accurate for 4 (#44, 57, 69 and #87) of 21 sampled residents reviewed for MDS accuracy.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings:A facility document titled MDS Completion and Submission Timeframes, dated October 2023, read in part, Our facility will conduct and submit resident assessments in accordance with current federal and state submission timeframes.1. A quarterly assessment for Res #57, dated 11/01/25, showed section C: cognitive patterns had not been completed.On 02/12/26 at 9:57 a.m., the MDS coordinator stated Res #57's section C of the MDS was answered not assessed. The MDS coordinator stated they should have been answered and assessed.2. An admission assessment for Res #87, dated 11/21/25, showed section C: cognitive patterns had not been completed.On 02/12/26 at 9:46 a.m., the MDS coordinator stated Res #87's section c of the MDS was answered not assessed. The MDS coordinator stated they should have been answered and assessed.3. An annual…
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 · E2026-02-12 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to electronically submit resident assessments to CMS for 2 (#13 and #27) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for MDS submission.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings:A MDS Completion and Submission Timeframes policy, dated 10/01/23, read in part, The assessment coordinator or designee is responsible for ensuring resident assessments are submitted to CMS' Internet Quality Improvement Evaluation System in accordance with current federal and state guidelines.1. A discharge assessment for Res #27, dated 11/07/25, showed the assessment had not been submitted to CMS.2. An annual assessment for Res #13, dated 12/30/25, showed the assessment had not been submitted to CMS.On 02/10/26 at 1:55 p.m., the MDS coordinator stated the MDS assessments for Res #13 and Res #27 were not submitted to CMS by the RN who reviewed and signed the assessments.
- Potential for harm · E2026-02-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure quarterly care plan meetings were held for 2 (#34 and #45) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for care plan meetings.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Resident Participation – Assessment/Care Plans policy, dated 11/01/25, showed the resident and/or the resident's representative were encouraged to participate in the development and implementation of the resident's care plans. 1. An admission record, dated 07/21/17, showed Res #34 had diagnoses which included multiple sclerosis and dementia. An annual assessment, dated 10/28/25, showed Res #34 had a BIMS score of 14 which indicated they were cognitively intact. A review of the health record for Res #34 showed their last care plan meeting was held on November 2024. On 02/09/26 at 11:06 a.m., Res #34 stated the facility had not been having care plan meetings. On 02/11/26 at 1:51 p.m., the SSD stated they had not completed quarterly care plan meetings as required. On 02/12/26 at 10:40 a.m., the DON stated care plan meetings…
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 · E2026-02-12 · tag F0847 — patternInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
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 an explicit statement was included in the arbitration agreement which stated the residents were not required to sign to be admitted for 3 (#47, 67, and #95) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for binding arbitration agreements.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings:A Binding Arbitration Agreements policy, dated 11/2023, read in part, Binding arbitration agreements are voluntary for the residents. Residents are not compelled, pressured, or coerced to enter into a binding arbitration agreement. It is unambiguously communicated to residents (or representatives) that binding arbitration agreements are optional and not required as a condition of admission or to receive care at this facility.1. A facility arbitration agreement for Res #95, dated 04/02/25, was signed by the resident's representative on 04/15/25. The agreement, read in part, the execution of this Arbitration agreement is not precondition to the furnishing of services to the Resident by the Facility.2. A facility arbitration…
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 · E2026-02-12 · tag F0848 — patternProvide a neutral and fair arbitration process and agree to arbitrator and venue.
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 binding arbitration agreements provided to residents and/or representative to sign including a stipulation for a neutral arbitrator to be chosen by both parties and for a venue for the arbitration at a location that is convenient to both parties for 3 (#47, 67, and #95) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for binding arbitration agreements.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings:A Binding Arbitration Agreements policy, dated 11/2023, read in part, Arbitration agreements provide for the selection of a neutral arbitrator, which is agreed upon by both parties. A neutral arbitrator is an impartial, unbiased, third-party decision maker, without the appearance of any conflicts of interest, contracted with and agreed to by moth parties to resolve their dispute.Arbitration agreements provide for the selection of a venue that is convenient to and suitably meets the needs of bother parties. The venue will be agreed upon by both parties. When selecting a venue for consideration, 'convenience' for…
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 before2026-02-12 · 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 use enhanced barrier precautions when performing peg tube (a type of feeding tube inserted into the stomach through the abdominal wall) care, peg tube feeding, and the administration of medication via peg tube for 1 (#86) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for a feeding tube.The DON identified two residents had a feeding tube.Findings:On 02/11/26 at 8:37 a.m., Res #86 was observed in bed sleeping. Res #86's room had no signage for enhanced barrier precautions, and no personal protective equipment was readily accessible to staff near the room.On 02/11/26 at 1:25 p.m., LPN #2 was observed to enter Res #86's room, performed hand hygiene, applied gloves, and checked for peg tube placement. LPN #2 inserted a syringe into the peg tube to check for residual. LPN #2 returned the residual into the peg tube and flushed with 50 cc of water. LPN #2 held the feeding since the residual was over 100 cc. LPN #2 did not wear a gown, the required enhanced barrier precautions for the attempted feeding.On 02/12/26 at 8:26 a.m., RN…
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 · D2026-02-12 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
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 ongoing side effect monitoring was completed for a resident receiving a psychotropic medication for 1 (#19) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.The DON identified 60 residents received psychotropic medications. Findings:An undated facility policy titled Monitoring and Reduction of Unnecessary Medications Related to Side Effects in Long-Term Care Residents, read in part, The facility is committed to minimizing unnecessary medications and ensuring that all medications are used safely, effectively, and in accordance with federal and state regulations. Staff must proactively monitor side effects, document findings, and collaborate with providers to adjust or discontinue medications when appropriate.A physician's order for Res #19, dated 08/29/25, showed the resident was to receive fluoxetine 10 milligrams (an antidepressant) by mouth every day.A quarterly assessment for Res #19, dated 12/12/25, showed the resident had a BIMS score of 12 which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. 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 · D2026-02-12 · 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 an allegation of abuse was reported to the OSDH and local law enforcement within two hours of becoming aware of the allegation for 1 (#10) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings:A facility Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation - Reporting and Investigation - F609 policy, dated 2001, read in part, All reports of resident abuse (including injuries of unknown origin), neglect, exploitation, or theft/misappropriation of resident property are reported to local, state and federal agencies (as require by current regulations) and thoroughly investigated by facility management. The policy showed reports of allegations of abuse would be made within two hours.An initial incident report form, incident date 01/27/26, showed on 01/27/26 the facility staff were made aware by a family member of an alleged act of abuse against Res #10. The incident report showed the administrator reported the incident to the OSDH and local law enforcement 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 · D2026-02-12 · 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 an allegation of abuse was investigated timely and the alleged perpetrator was prevented from working with the alleged victim until the conclusion of the investigation for 1 (#10) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings:A facility Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation - Reporting and Investigation - F609 policy, dated 2001, read in part, All reports of resident abuse (including injuries of unknown origin), neglect, exploitation, or theft/misappropriation of resident property are reported to local, state and federal agencies (as require by current regulations) and thoroughly investigated by facility management. The policy showed staff was to ensure the alleged perpetrator and victim were kept apart and the alleged perpetrator was to be placed on leave until completion of an investigation.An initial incident report form, incident date 01/27/26, showed on 01/27/26 facility staff were made aware by a family member of an alleged act…
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 · D2026-02-12 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a written notice of transfer to a resident discharged to an acute care facility prior to transfer for 1 (#92) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for discharges.The DON identified 60 residents discharged during the three months prior to the survey.Findings:A facility Transfer or Discharge policy, dated April 2025, did not include the requirement to notify the resident or their representatives in writing prior to transfer or discharge.A nurse's note for Res #92, dated 01/03/26, showed at 11:23 a.m., the resident was sent to an acute care hospital for behaviors.On 02/11/26 at 1:19 p.m., LPN #1 stated they had not heard of a written notice of transfer and had never given one to any of the residents they had transferred or discharged .On 02/11/26 at 1:22 p.m., the DON stated they were unaware of the requirement for a written notice of transfer to be given to a resident or their representative prior to transfer or discharge. They stated they had not been providing those notices to residents.
Show the remaining 21 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was developed for 1 (#91) of 20 sampled residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings:A facility Care Plans, Comprehensive, Person-Centered policy, dated March 2022, read in part, A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. The policy showed the comprehensive care plans were to be completed within seven days of completion of the required MDS assessment and no more than 21 days after admission to the facility.An admission record for Res #91, dated 10/07/25, showed the resident had been admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 11/23/25.An admission assessment for Res #91, dated 10/14/25, showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of the electronic…
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 · D2026-02-12 · tag F0680 — isolatedEnsure the activities program is directed by a qualified professional.
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 have a qualified activity director. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings:On 02/09/26 at 2:42 p.m., residents were observed in the dining area playing bingo with an automated bingo machine that was calling the bingo numbers with CMA #3 sitting at the table.On 02/11/26 at 12:02 p.m., the activity board was observed. The board showed the facility was to have coffee and conservations every Monday and Friday at 10:45 a.m., bible study every Tuesday at 10:45 a.m., and stretch every Thursday at 10:45 a.m.On 02/11/26 at 1:15 p.m., residents were observed sitting at various tables playing bingo with an automated game that called out the numbers for the game.An undated facility Resident Rights poster showed the facility would provide a program of activities designed to meet the residents needs and interests.On 02/11/26 at 1:40 p.m., the social worker stated either they or another staff member would assist with activities. They stated they did not know how long the facility had been…
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 before2026-02-12 · 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 — 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 refrigerator temperatures were recorded for 1 (medication room [ROOM NUMBER]) of 2 medication refrigerators observed for safe storage of medication.The DON identified two medication rooms with medication storage refrigerators in the facility.Findings:On 02/10/26 at 9:33 a.m., medication room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with the DON. Inside the medication room was a full-size refrigerator that contained medications and did not have a temperature record log attached for February 2026. A facility Storage of Medications policy, dated 2001, read in part, Drugs and biologicals used in the facility are stored in locked compartments and under proper temperature, light and humidity controls.On 02/10/26 at 10:11 a.m., the DON stated they searched and were unable to locate the missing temperature log for the medication refrigerator located in medication room [ROOM NUMBER]. They stated the log should have been kept on the refrigerator 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 · Dcited before2026-02-12 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a urine sample was not stored in a refrigerator used to store resident food for 1 (medication room [ROOM NUMBER]) of 2 sampled medication room food storage refrigerators observed for infection control.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings: On 02/10/26 at 9:33 a.m., a mini refrigerator located in medication room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed to have a box of bacon, two protein shakes, one individual sized ice cream, two mighty shakes, and one urine specimen cup filled halfway with a yellow substance and sealed in a plastic lab bag. The cup had the name of a former resident written on it. The specimen cup and bag were laying on top of the ice cream and mighty shakes container. On 02/10/26 at 9:37 a.m., DON stated the food inside the mini refrigerator located in medication room [ROOM NUMBER] was to store resident food items. They stated the urine specimen cup should not have been stored in that refrigerator. 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 · D2026-02-12 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 the call light was operational for 1 (#94) of 3 sampled residents whose call lights were tested.The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.Findings:On 02/10/26 at 9:05 a.m., Res #94 was observed to push their call light to test it. The light outside of the resident's room above the door did not light up or sound. The resident had no bell to ring for assistance.On 02/10/26 at 9:06 a.m., the monitor connected to the call lights at the nurses' station did not display Res #94's room number.On 02/11/26 at 9:24 a.m., an observation of the maintenance logbook at the nurses' station showed no call lights that needed to be fixed.On 02/11/25 at 9:25 a.m., CNA #5 was observed to document in the maintenance logbook that the call light in Res #94's room was not working, and the call light in room [ROOM NUMBER] was not working.An Answering the Call Light policy, dated 09/01/22, read in part, Ensure that the call light is…
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 · D2025-06-04 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure protected health information was secure for 1 (station 3 medication/treatment cart) of 2 medication/treatment carts on station 3. The administrator identifed 95 residents resided in the facility. On 05/30/25 at 9:15 a.m., a computer on top of an unattended medication/treatment cart at nurses station 3, was observed to be open and showed protected health information. On 05/30/25 at 9:20 a.m., CMA #1 closed the computer and stated they did not know where the nurse assigned to the cart was. On 05/30/25 at 9:30 a.m., the administrator stated the computer should not have been left open with resident information visible. On 05/30/25 at 9:36 a.m., RN #1, who was assigned to the medication/treatment cart, stated the computer should have been closed and not showing protected health information.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-04 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were secure for 1 (station 3 medication/treatment cart) of 2 medication/treatment carts on station 3. The administrator identifed 95 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 05/30/25 at 9:15 a.m., the station 3 nurses medication/treatment cart was observed to be unlocked and unattended at the nurses station. On top of the cart was a bottle Hysept wound cleanser and a medicine cup containing an unidentified gel. An undated policy titled Medication Labeling and Storage, read in part, 4. Compartments (including, but not limited to, drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts and boxes) containing medications and biologicals are locked when not in use, and trays or carts used to transport such items are not left unattended if open or otherwise potentially available to others. On 05/30/25 at 9:20 a.m., CNA #1 locked the cart and stated they did not know where the nurse assigned to the cart was. On 05/30/25 at 9:30 a.m., the administrator stated the medication/treatment cart should have…
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 · E2024-11-07 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to administer a cardiac medication as prescribed for one (#50) of 10 residents observed during a medication administration pass. The facility administrator identified 48 residents who were prescribed cardiac medications. Findings: Resident #50 had diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation. A physician's order, dated 09/12/24, documented the resident was to receive 100 milligrams amiodarone (antiarrhythmic medication) daily for atrial fibrillation. The order documented to monitor blood pressure for hypotension and heart rate for increased rate. The September 2024 MAR documented the resident missed six of 18 doses of amiodarone from 09/13/24 through 09/30/24. The October 2024 MAR documented the resident missed 11 of 31 doses of amiodarone. The November 2024 MAR documented the resident missed four of seven doses of amiodarone from 11/01/24 through 11/07/24. On 11/07/24 at 9:55 a.m., CMA #2 did not administer the amiodarone for Resident #50. On 11/07/24 at 1:10 p.m., CMA #2 stated the amiodarone was given to raise 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 · Ecited before2024-11-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the physical environment of the kitchen and kitchen equipment were kept clean and maintained in good repair. The administrator identified 83 residents ate meals prepared in the kitchen. Findings: On 11/06/24 at 10:15 a.m., cook #1 was observed to puree pork. [NAME] #1 placed cut pieces of pork into a bladed container, placed the container on the base, and the lid on top of the container. The container was observed to be cracked and missing sections of the bottom edge which secured the container to the base. On 11/06/24 at 10:15 a.m., cook #1 stated the container was broken and they had to hold the container down onto the base to get the unit to puree foods. On 11/06/24 at 10:20 a.m., observations of the kitchen and ice machine were conducted: a. there was standing water on the floor below the dish machine, the drying rack, the walk way in front of the drying rack, and to the dry goods storage room; b. a box fan with a screen was covered in dust. The box fan blew air across the food preparation stations; c. a ceiling…
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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were assessed for the use of bed rails prior to installation for one (#11) of one resident who was reviewed for bed rails. The administrator identifed 52 residents using bed rails. Findings: Resident #11 had a diagnosis which included dementia. A review of Resident #11's medical record did not reveal the resident was assessed for the use of bed rails. On 11/06/24 at 2:18 p.m., bed rails were observed to be up on both sides of the resident's bed. On 11/07/24 at 4:07 p.m., the administrator stated the bed rail assessment page did not automatically populate, so the nurses had to manually pull that up. They stated it did not get done for Resident #11.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 to adhere to enhanced barrier precautions while providing wound care for one (#187) of one sampled resident reviewed for wound care. The administrator identified 83 residents resided in the facility and eight residents on enhanced barrier precautions. An undated facility Enhanced Barrier Precautions policy, documented high contact resident care activities such as wound care required the use of gown and gloves. Resident #187 had diagnoses which included a sacral pressure ulcer. On 11/07/24 at 10:19 a.m., RN #1 and LPN #3 prepared to treat Resident #187's pressure ulcer. Both sanitized their hands and donned gloves. Before wound care began, RN #1 was asked if there was any other infection control measures to take before starting wound care. RN #1 stated, No. RN #1 and LPN #3 did not don gowns. They proceeded with wound care. On 11/07/24 at 11:06 a.m., LPN #3 stated for regular wound care, they just wore gloves, if MRSA they wore a gown and mask. On 11/07/24 at 11:11 a.m., the administrator stated gowns were to…
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 · E2024-07-11 · tag F0570 — patternAssure the security of all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to secure a surety bond with sufficient coverage for the account balance. The Business office manger identified 15 residents that have money in the trust account and were current residents. Findings: A review of the current surety bond for the resident trust account documented the surety bond had coverage of $10,000 The resident trust account monthly bank statement, 07/11/24, documented the account balance was $18,330.30. On 07/11/24 at 3:01 p.m., the corporate regional manager confirmed the surety bond was only for $10,000. They stated the previous month they had noticed the surety bond did not cover the trust account balance and had contacted the insurance company, but it had not been corrected.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-11 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to deposit resident personal funds in excess of $50 in an interest bearing account that is separate from the facility's operation accounts for one (# 1) of three residents reviewed for facility funds. The Business office manger identified 15 residents that have money in the trust account and were current residents. Findings: A review of resident accounts balances documented Resident # 1 had a credit balance of $1,471.00 in the facility's accounts receivable account from 01/19/24 carried through to the current date. Resident # 1 did not have funds in the facility's trust account. On 07/11/24 at 11:22 a.m., the corporate business office manager stated the money was left in the operating system per the family. They then stated the operating system was not an interest bearing account. On 07/11/22 at 3:01 p.m. the corporate regional manager stated resident funds are not to be commingled with operating funds.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-28 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were available for one (#5) of three residents reviewed for medication availability. The Administrator identified 76 residents in the facility who required medications. Findings: A Facility policy titled Medication Orders read in parts, .Emergency/STAT Medication Order (Medication NOT Contained in Emergency Medication Supply) .the medication is scheduled to be given as soon as received or within 4 hours, whichever is sooner . Resident #5 had diagnoses which included acute kidney failure. On 01/05/24 Resident #5 returned to the facility from a local hospital. Discharge orders from the hospital documented the resident was discharged back to the facility at 5:30 p.m., with an order for the medication cefepime (an antibiotic) 2,000 mg in sodium chloride 0.9% 50 ml IVPB every 12 hours. The MAR for Resident #5 documented the medication was administered on 01/06/24 at 1900. On 2/28/24 at 1:52 p.m., the ADON stated antibiotics are considered a STAT order to pharmacy and, depending on the time ordered, should 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 · D2024-02-28 · tag F0837 — isolatedEstablish a governing body that is legally responsible for establishing and implementing policies for managing and operating the facility and appoints a properly licensed administrator responsible for managing the facility.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to have an administrator of record. The administrator identified 76 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: On 02/26/24 at 2:00 p.m. the Administrator stated the previous administrator left their position with the facility on 11/23/23. They stated their first day as Administrator at the facility was 01/18/24. The Administrator stated they would check to see who was the acting administrator during the interim between 11/23/23 and 01/18/24. On 02/28/24 at 2:38 p.m. the Administrator stated they were unable to determine if anyone was the interim administrator for the facility. They stated that as far as they could determine, no one occupied that position between 11/23/23 and 01/18/24. By the end of the survey, requested documentation related to administration coverage for the facility was not provided.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-28 · 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 as scheduled for four (#23, 34, 63, and #231) of five residents reviewed for ADLs. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Res #23 was admitted to the facility 07/15/23 with diagnoses which included multiple sclerosis. An MDS assessment for Res #23, dated 07/29/23, documented the resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. The assessment documented the resident's cognition was intact. The care plan for Res #23, dated 05/11/23, read in part, .I have an ADL self care performance deficit, AEB impaired balance with surface transitions, poor decision making and muscle weakness/wasting R/T progression of multiple sclerosis .I require limited assist of one staff for bed mobility, bathing, dressing and hygiene . On 09/21/23 at 4:35 p.m., Res #23 reported getting a shower that day but stated it had been 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 · E2023-09-28 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 showers, incontinent care, and answer call lights in a timely manner for six (#34, 63, 23, 64, 65, and #231) of six residents reviewed for sufficient staffing to meet the needs of residents. The ''Resident Census and Conditions of Residents'' form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided in the facility. The form documented 15 residents were dependent on staff for bathing, 60 residents required one or two staff assistance with bathing, and 64 residents required assistance of one or two staff with toileting. Findings: On 09/21/23 at 1:42 p.m., Res #34 reported they would ask a nurse for a shower, they would write the resident's name down to get one, but most of the time they still wouldn't get a shower. On 09/21/23 at 3:40 p.m., Res #63 reported they occasionally got a shower if they could get a CNA to help with one. On 09/21/23 at 4:35 p.m., Res #23 reported they had received a shower that day but it had been a week since their previous shower. The resident stated they were scheduled to get 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 · Ecited before2023-09-28 · 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 available, per the pharmacy policy and procedure, for one (#233) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided in the facility. Findings: The facility policies and procedures, Medication Orders and Receipt Record, read in part .medications should be ordered in advance the receiving nurse shall record medication orders received . The facility admission Check List, read in part, .meds must be completed in the first 2 hours . Res #233 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included diabetes mellitus, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, anxiety disorder, and delusional disorder. A hospital discharge reconciliation report, dated 09/25/23, documented the date and time the resident's medications were last given and a list of medications to continue at home. A facility ''Order Summary Report, for Res #233, 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 · D2023-09-28 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their abuse policy and procedures by failing to screen and obtain a background check on one (CMA #1) of five employees reviewed for screening upon hire. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided at the facility. Findings: The facility Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention policy, read in part, .The resident abuse, neglect and exploitation prevention program consists of a facility-wide commitment and resource allocation to support the following objectives .Conduct employee background checks . On 09/27/23 at 1:10 p.m., the employee file for CMA #1 was reviewed. The file documented the CMA was hired on 08/18/23 and had signed a copy of the facility's abuse policy. The file did not contain a background or offender/registry check. On 09/27/23 at 1:25 p.m., administrator #2 (an administrator from a sister facility), reported the normal procedure for any new applicant was to try and obtain all new-hire paperwork and implement background…
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 · D2023-09-28 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan, within 48 hours of admission, for one (#231) of three residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Res #231 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included multiple fractures due to trauma, depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, acute pain due to trauma, and a surgical wound. An MDS assessment for Res #231, dated 09/15/23, documented their cognition was intact and limited assistance was required for most ADLs. A temporary care plan for Res #231, dated 09/15/23, read in part .Upon admission staff will perform systematic and continuous collection, organization, validations, and documentation of data to optimize my abilities, maximize by comfort and dignity through personalizing my plan of care through daily choices and preferences .Assess/evaluate resident's needs:…
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 · D2023-09-28 · tag F0729 — isolatedVerify that a nurse aide has been trained; and if they haven't worked as a nurse aide for 2 years, receive retraining.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain registry verification for one (CMA #1) of five employee files reviewed for registry verification. On [DATE] at 1:10 p.m., the employee file for CMA #1 was reviewed and documented the CMA's certification had expired on [DATE]. The file documented the employee was hired on [DATE] to work as a CMA. On [DATE] at 1:25 p.m., administrator #2 reported the normal procedure for any new applicant was to try and obtain all new-hire paperwork and implement background checks within the first 24 hours. Administrator #2 stated he wasn't sure what happened with CMA #1 or why the proper protocol wasn't followed. The administrator stated if the proper protocol had been followed, the expired CMA certificate would have shown up. The administrator confirmed the CMA's certificate had expired on [DATE] and the CMA's hire date was [DATE].
“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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COX BUILDING COMPANY, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2008 |
| COX, STEVEN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2008 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 2 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.
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 375528. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-12, 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.