No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Grand Lake Villa

103 Har-Ber Road, Grove, OK 74344 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 100 certified beds · (918) 786-2276 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuseBehavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)3 immediate-jeopardy citations$32,576 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0607, F0610) — most recent Apr 2026
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $32,576 in federal fines (most recent 2026-04-29)
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection 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.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 4 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2229 S Main St · (918) 786-7300 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1119 S Main St · (918) 786-6867 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1120 S Main St · (918) 786-4087 · Call to confirm hours
Park
E 10th St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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 held steady at 5 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased16.8%13.6%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.0%3.3%5.4%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.8%1.9%0.9%typical
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.4%2.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%3.4%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.5%4.7%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened8.6%13.7%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication27.8%25.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.4%94.6%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.0%4.7%4.7%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control26.2%17.1%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.5%17.5%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.8%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine88.6%74.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission19.4%27.3%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.2%16.6%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.632.311.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.302.961.80better

* 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.

§ 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.

55.8% 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 81 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

55.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
82.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.23U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.09hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 82.8% 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 58 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF55.8%CMS range 45.6–65.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.7%CMS range 7.2–16.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge82.8%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge86.2%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge81.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 dischargenot 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 stay1.3%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.3%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization8.2%CMS range 5.1–14.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.941.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.66
RN hours/ resident / day
0.40
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.06
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.12
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.65
RN hoursweekends
40.6%
Total nursing turnover
30.8%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 65.9 residents a day — about 66% occupied, or roughly 34 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 4.12 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.66 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.06 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 3.80 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.25 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.66 to 0.65 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

9
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-29)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-12)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

15 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-04-29 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    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 resident was not sexually abused for 1 (#48) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for sexual abuse.The DON identified 65 residents resided in the facility.On 04/23/26, an immediate jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to ensure Res #48 was not sexually assaulted by Res #17 on 03/11/26. This failure caused Res #48 to be fearful living at the facility.On 04/23/26 at 4:30 p.m., the OSDH was notified and verified the existence of the IJ related to the sexual assault of Res #48 by Res #17.On 04/23/26 at 4:33 p.m. the administrator and DON were notified of the IJ situation and provided with the IJ template.On 04/29/26 at 8:27 a.m., an acceptable plan of removal was approved by the OSDH. The plan of removal, read in part, Resident #17 and resident #48 were immediately separated upon finding of incident. On 4/24/26 resident [Resident #17] was placed on 1:1 supervision until resident was discharged from facility at approximately 3:30pm on 4/24/2026 per POA's choice. Resident #48 was…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-04-29 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility's abuse policy had been implemented after an allegation of abuse for 1 (#48) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for abuse.The DON identified 65 residents resided in the facility.On 04/23/26, an immediate jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to ensure Res #48 was not sexually assaulted by Res #17 on 03/11/26. This failure caused Res #48 to be fearful living at the facility.On 04/23/26 at 4:30 p.m., the OSDH was notified and verified the existence of the IJ related to the facility not implementing their abuse policy related to sexual assault.On 04/23/26 at 4:33 p.m. the administrator and DON were notified of the IJ situation and provided the IJ template.On 04/29/26 at 8:27 a.m., an acceptable plan of removal was approved by the OSDH. The plan of removal, read in part, [name withheld], Grand Lake Villa Abuse Coordinator/Administrator, has been re-educated on revised/updated Abuse Policy on 4/24/26 by [name withheld], Director of Operations for [company name…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-04-29 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review an interview, the facility failed to ensure a thorough investigation of an allegation of sexual abuse was conducted for 1 (#48) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for abuse.The DON identified 65 residents resided in the facility.On 04/23/26, an immediate jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to ensure Res #48 was not sexually assaulted by Res #17 on 03/11/26. This failure caused Res #48 to be fearful living at the facility.On 04/23/26 at 4:30 p.m., the OSDH was notified and verified the existence of the IJ related to the facility not thoroughly investigating and reporting the sexual assault of Res #48 by Res #17.On 04/23/26 at 4:33 p.m. the administrator and DON were notified of the IJ situation and provided the IJ template.On 04/29/26 at 8:27 a.m., the plan of removal was approved by the OSDH. The plan of removal, read in part, Resident #17 and resident #48 were immediately separated upon finding of incident. On 4/24/26 resident [Resident #17] was placed on 1:1 supervision until resident was discharged from facility at…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2026-04-29 · tag F0944 — widespread
    Conduct mandatory training, for all staff, on the facility’s Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Program.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure facility staff had been trained in the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement program for 103 of 103 employees of the facility.The assistant director of nursing identified 103 employees worked in the facility.Findings:An undated Quality Assurance / Assessment and Performance Improvement Plan, read in part, All staff, including contracted staff, are educated on the principles of QAPI. QAPI is included in the orientation of new employees and in the annual education that all staff are required to attend.An undated Inservice Schedule, was reviewed. The schedule did not included training on the subject of QAPI.On 04/28/26 at 11:43 a.m., the DON stated the facility had not conducted any training with all their staff on QAPI. The DON stated they had reviewed their records and found no documentation of the facility staff being trained in QAPI. The DON stated they had looked at their annual training list and did not find QAPI listed as one of the subjects.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-29 · tag F0847 — pattern
    Inform 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 residents understood binding arbitration agreements before signing them for 2 (#55 and #56) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for binding arbitration agreements.The DON identified 65 residents resided in the facility.Findings:1. An Arbitration of Disputes document in the assessment agreement, dated 09/29/25, read in part, Any and all claims, controversies, disputes, disagreements or demands of any kind .arising out of or in any relating to the Agreement, including the interpretation of this Agreement, or the Residents stay at, or the care of services provided by, the Facility shall be resolved exclusively by binding arbitration. The document showed Res #56's name printed in the resident representative's section of the signature page of the admission agreement. The SSD signed in the facility's representative area of the signature page.An admission assessment, dated 10/05/25, showed Res #56 had a BIMS score of 15 (a BIMS score of 15 indicated the resident's cognition was intact and was able to make decisions of daily…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-29 · tag F0848 — pattern
    Provide 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 did not pre-determine the arbitrator for arbitration proceedings for 2 (#55 and #56) of 2 sampled residents binding arbitration agreements reviewed for binding arbitration agreements.The DON identified 65 residents resided in the facility.Findings:1.An Arbitration of Disputes document in the assessment agreement, dated 09/29/25, read in part, The parties' intend that the Arbitration Services shall be Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc (JAMS) or its successor. If JAMS is unable or unwilling to service as the Arbitration Service, the parties' intent [sic] that the National Arbitration Forum ('NAF') or its successor shall serve as the Arbitration Service. The document showed Res #56's name printed in the resident representative's section of the signature page of the admission agreement. The SSD signed in the facility's representative area of the signature page.2.An Arbitration of Disputes document in the assessment agreement, dated 04/08/26, read in part, The parties' intend…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-29 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to include the estimated cost of services on a SNF ABN form CMS-10055 for 1 (#69) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for beneficiary notices.The DON identified 29 residents had been discharged from skilled services within the last six months. Findings:A document titled Form Instruction Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNFABN) Form CMS-10055 (2018), dated 2018, read in part, Estimated Cost Section. In this section, the SNF enters the estimated cost of the corresponding care that may not be covered by Medicare. The SNF should enter an estimated total cost or a daily, per item, or per service cost estimate.A CMS-10055 form for Res #69, dated 03/25/26, showed the resident's representative had indicated on the form they wanted to continue the skilled services mentioned on the form and they may be responsible for the costs if Medicare denied the claim. The form showed physical therapy, occupational therapy, daily skilled nursing care, and speech therapy as the services that may not be covered 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-29 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely 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 report an alleged incident of sexual abuse to the OSDH within the required two-hour time frame for 1 (#48) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for abuse.The DON identified 65 residents resided in the facility.Findings:An abuse policy titled Abuse - Neglect - Misappropriation - Mistreatment Policy, dated 02/16/24, read in part, The facility will send a report to all reporting agencies as required by OSDH guidelines. The facility will send a report to the ODSH on form 283 within 2 hours of being notified of any allegation.A health status note authored by RN #1, dated 03/11/26 at 7:53 p.m., showed LPN #3 had found Res #17 touching Res #48 inappropriately through Res #48's clothing. The note showed RN #1 had separated the two residents, RN #1 had asked Res #48 if they were ok with the other resident touching them, and Res #48 had replied, No. The note showed the DON had been contacted about the incident.An initial incident report, dated 04/22/26, showed an incident of alleged abuse had occurred on 03/11/26 and was reported to 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-29 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a quarterly assessment accurately reflected a resident's fall history for 1 (#2) of 17 sampled residents reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy.The DON identified 65 residents resided in the facility.Findings:A quarterly assessment, dated 01/08/26, showed Res #2 had not had any falls. A health status note, dated 01/19/26 at 7:51 p.m., showed Res #2 had been found lying on the floor. The note showed no injuries were found on the resident.An incident note, dated 02/22/26 at 1:58 p.m., showed Res #2 had been found on the floor of their room. The note showed no injuries were found on the resident.An incident note, dated 03/05/26, showed Res #2 had been found on the floor of their room. The note showed no injuries were found to the resident.An incident note, dated 03/24/26, showed Res #2 was found on the floor of the locked unit's television room and the resident had a small hematoma on their head.A health status note, dated 04/09/26, showed Res #2 had been found lying on the floor after they were hit by a door someone 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-13 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely 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 APS was notified of an allegation of abuse for 1 (#3) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The DON reported the facility census was 59. Findings: An admission record, dated 05/12/22, showed Res #1 had diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease and anxiety. A facility document titled Abuse-Neglect-Misappropriation-Mistreatment Policy, dated 02/16/24, read in part, The facility will send a report to all reporting agencies as required by OSDH guidelines .The facility will send copies of the report to the OSDH/Adult Protective Services at the same time the report is sent to the OSDH. A quarterly assessment, dated 05/15/25, showed Res #3 had a brief interview for mental status score (a test for cognitive function) of 3, which was indicative of severe cognitive impairment. The assessment also showed Res #3 was dependent on staff for care. A nurse's note, dated 06/09/25 at 8:28 a.m., showed an allegation of abuse was reported to facility staff involving Res #3. The note also showed the OSDH, police department,…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-08 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely 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 alleged incident of physical and verbal abuse was reported to the facility administrator and Oklahoma State Department of Health within two hours of the allegation for one (#1) of four sampled resident reviewed for abuse. A facility census report, dated 07/08/24, documented 56 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An Abuse Investigating and Reporting policy, dated 2017, read in part, An alleged violation of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment (including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property) will be reported immediately, but not later than: a. Two (2) hours if the alleged violation involves abuse OR (sic) resulted in serious bodily injury; or b. Twenty-four (24) hours if the alleged violation does not involve abuse AND (sic) has not resulted in serious bodily injury. An ODH 283 form (incident report form) documented an allegation of physical and verbal abuse occurred on 06/08/24. The form documented the allegation was reported to the DON on 06/10/24. A facility…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-05-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure 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 maintain the ice machine in a sanitary manner for one of one ice machines observed. The DON identified 63 residents who received nourishment from the kitchen. Findings: On 05/02/23 at 10:40 a.m., the maintenance supervisor was asked who was responsible for cleaning the ice machine. The maintenance supervisor stated the machine was leased and the leasing company performed all cleanings. The maintenance supervisor stated the machine was last cleaned in March 2023. The ice machine was observed with the maintenance supervisor. They removed the panel covering the mechanical components used to make the ice. An opaque tube, which appeared to run from the water reservoir, located at the base of the machine, to the top of the evaporator, was observed to have a shadowy, transitioning to a solid black, substance caked to the interior of the tube. The maintenance supervisor was asked what the substance was in the interior of the tube. The maintenance supervisor stated it was nasty and they would contact the supplier to clean the machine.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-05 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure assessments were accurate for one (#2) of one resident who was reviewed for hospice services. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 05/02/23, documented 12 residents received hospice services. Findings: Resident #2 had diagnoses which included congestive heart failure. A Physician's Order, dated 08/30/22, documented to admit the resident to hospice services. A Hospice Certification of Terminal Illness form, dated 09/01/22 through 11/29/22, read in part, .Verbal Certification .Medical Director .I certify that this patient is terminally ill with a life expectancy of six months or less if the disease follows its normal course . The Certification was electronically signed by the physician. The significant change assessment, dated 09/09/22, documented the resident did not have a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectancy of less than six months. A Hospice Certification of Terminal Illness form, dated 11/30/22 through 02/27/23, read in part, .Verbal Certification .Medical…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure care plans were reviewed and revised for one (#36) of 15 residents reviewed for care plans. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 05/02/23, documented 60 residents resided at the facility. Findings: Resident #36 had diagnoses which included congestive heart failure. A Physician's Order, dated 02/15/23, documented to administer lorazepam 0.5 mg every eight hours as needed for anxiety. This order was discontinued on 03/04/23. Review of the Care Plan, dated 02/23/23, did not reveal a problem, goal, or interventions for anxiety. A Physician's Order, dated 03/04/23, documented to administer lorazepam 0.5 mg every eight hours as needed for anxiety. On 05/05/23 at 3:15 p.m., the MDS/Care Plan nurse was asked why the care plan for Resident #36 had not been revised to include a care plan for anxiety. They stated they must have overlooked it.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-05 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    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 psychotropic medications were not ordered past 14 days without a documented physician's clinical rationale for two (#24 and #36) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The DON identified 12 residents who received as needed psychotropic medications. Findings: An Antipsychotic Medication Use policy, dated December 2016, read in part, .The need to continue PRN orders for psychotropic medications beyond 14 days requires that the practitioner document the rationale for the extended order. The duration of the PRN order will be indicated in the order . 1. Resident #36 had diagnoses which included congestive heart failure. A physician's order, dated 02/15/23, documented to administer one tablet of lorazepam 0.5 mg every eight hours as needed for anxiety. A physician's order, dated 03/04/23, documented to administer one tablet of lorazepam 0.5 mg every eight hours as needed for anxiety for 60 days. Review of the April 2023 medication administration records revealed the resident had the order 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$32,576 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $32,576 — penalty dated 2026-04-29

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to MARSH POINTE MANAGEMENT — 6 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Health inspection 1 of 52.2-1.2 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 53.8+1.2 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.0+2.0 vs chain
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
OKLAHOMA FINANCIAL LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF35%since 07/30/2020
OKLAHOMA OPERATING LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF65%since 07/30/2020
BROGDON, CONNIEIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF65%since 07/30/2020
BROGDON, CHRISTOPHERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2011
NICHOLS, CHERYLIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/20/2024
MARSH POINTE MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2014
TIDWELL, RICHARDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/09/2018

CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 organizational owners 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.

$5.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-2.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$198K
Related-party expense4% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 83%Medicare 8%Other / private 9%

About 83% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $198K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent 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

$243per resident / day
operating cost
$7,376per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$236per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Oklahoma
$7,026/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,756/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,150/mo
Assisted living

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 375116. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-29, 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.

What to do next