Colonial Manor II
120 West Versa, Hollis, OK 73550 · Government - County · 92 certified beds · (580) 688-9431 Medicaid only — no Medicare
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- 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 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- it did not file the payroll staffing data CMS requires — its 1 of 5 staffing rating is the rating CMS assigns for not reporting, not a measure of how many nurses are on the floor
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 3 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 | 13.2% | 13.6% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.3% | 3.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 5.2% | 1.9% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 7.0% | 2.8% | 2.0% | worse |
| 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 | 5.6% | 4.7% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.0% | 13.7% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 41.3% | 25.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.0% | 94.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.1% | 4.7% | 4.7% | better |
| 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 | 12.4% | 17.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.99 | 2.31 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.75 | 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.
Staffing
No payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours are on file for this home — and the record suggests that is because it did not report them. Inspectors cited this home for failing to submit its staffing data to CMS (F0851) — see the citation below; CMS rates its staffing 1 of 5, which is the rating CMS assigns when a home does not report. Every Medicare-certified nursing home is required to submit its actual payroll data quarterly, and that submission is what makes staffing numbers auditable rather than a claim. A home that does not file is not the same as a home with no data yet: ask this home directly what its nurse-to-resident ratios and weekend RN coverage are, why its payroll data is not filed, and weigh the independent health-inspection score heavily in the meantime.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2023-04-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY On [DATE], an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to perform neuro checks as ordered by the physician, and to notify the physician with a change of condition per the facility's Neuro Checks Policy and Procedure. The resident passed away that night. On [DATE] at 1:05 a.m., Resident #43 had a fall and reported to the nurse he had hit his head and complained of pain all over. The resident was sent to the ER per physician orders. The hospital record documented the resident fell backwards and was complaining of a headache. The resident was given pain medication and sent back to the facility with orders to do neuro checks every two hours for 24 hours. The neuro check form documented neuro checks were completed every two hours until 7:30 p.m. The form had no neuro checks documented at 9:30 p.m. At 10:45 p.m., the resident started having behaviors. No neuro checks or vital signs were documented at that time and the physician was not notified of a change in…
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 · E2026-01-08 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
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 assess and monitor a resident before and after dialysis treatments for 1 (#4) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for dialysis.The administrator identified one resident required dialysis services. Findings: On 01/06/26 at 3:20 p.m., Resident #4 pulled up their sleeve and showed the dialysis shunt site on their left forearm to this surveyor. An undated policy titled Dialysis, showed nursing staff would monitor residents before and after dialysis, and dialysis access sites would be protected and observed for signs of infection or complications. The policy showed all dialysis-related care, observations, and communications would be documented in the resident's medical record. A care plan, dated 12/15/25, showed a goal to manage Resident #4's end-stage renal disease while attending dialysis on Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. The care plan showed to ensure the resident was safely transported to and from dialysis and the resident was encouraged to report any symptoms related to dialysis. Resident #4's admission…
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 before2026-01-08 · 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 ensure staff used enhanced barrier precautions during catheter care for 1 (#11) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for catheter care.The facility roster matrix showed four residents in the facility had urinary catheters. Findings:On 01/07/26 at 9:35 a.m., CNA #1 and CNA #2 were observed to provide urinary catheter care for Resident #11. The CNAs were observed to provide resident privacy, set up supplies, and don gloves. The CNAs were observed to provide catheter care without wearing a gown.An undated policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, showed enhanced barrier precautions were needed for residents with a catheter to prevent the spread of infections, especially multidrug-resistant organisms in the facility. The policy showed gloves and gowns must be worn whenever touching the resident or their environment.A care plan, dated 12/05/25, showed Resident #11 had an indwelling catheter and was at risk for infection and complications related to catheter use and required enhanced barrier precautions to maintain…
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 before2024-10-15 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely 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 the results of an abuse investigation were submitted to the state within five business days for one (#1) sampled resident reviewed for abuse. The administrator identified 39 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An undated facility policy titled Policy: for reporting neglect and/or abuse, read in part, 1. Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for reporting incidents of abuse and neglect in a long-term care facility, in compliance with state and federal regulations. Resident #1 had diagnosis which included mental disorder and was wheelchair bound. An Initial State Reportable Incident form, faxed 07/22/24 at 12:30 p.m., documented an allegation of abuse/mistreatment. It documented CNA #2 notified CNA #1 that Resident #1 had picked up their pizza box. CNA #1 grabbed Resident #1's wheelchair and spun them around and yelled in their face, and then again aggressively spun them around and pushed them from the table while being gruff and yelling at them. It documented cameras were in use 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-07 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of abuse was reported within 24 hours to OSDH of an incident of abuse for one (#1) of three sampled residents reviewed for allegations of abuse. The DON reported 38 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An incident report dated 06/03/24 at 2:57 p.m. CNA#1 reported alleged abuse occurred on 06/01/24. CNA #1did not report to LPN#1 until 06/02/24. On 06/06/24 at 4:15 p.m., CNA#1 stated the alleged abuse occurred on 06/02/24 at 6a.m. during the 11a.m.-7p.m. shift. The alleged abuse was reported on 06/02/24 11p.m. to 7a.m. shift to LPN #1 charge nurse. On 06/07/24 at 1:04 p.m., the Administrator reported CNA #1 witnessed an abuse on 06/01/24 and reported to LPN #1. On 06/02/24, the incident report was faxed on 06/03/24 at 2:57 p.m The 24 hours had exceeded.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-07 · tag F0943 — isolatedGive their staff education on dementia care, and what abuse, neglect, and exploitation are; and how to report abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that training was being provided for activities that contribute abuse/neglect, procedures for reporting incidents of abuse/neglect, and abuse prevention for one (#1) of one records records reviewed for abuse. The DON reported 38 residents reside in the facility. Findings: A Policy and Procedure: Training for Nurses and CNAs policy, undated, read in parts .Documentation will include dates and training, completion status, competency assessment results, and certificates of participation or completion .The Quality Assurance department will conduct periodic audits of training records to verify compliance with training . On 06/06/24 at 3:58 p.m., there was no documentation of CNA #1 of having abuse/neglect training of which includes reporting incidents of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or the misappropriation of resident property during CNA #1's orientation. On 06/07/24 at 1:06 p.m., the DON reported CNA #1 had no abuse/neglect training's completed during orientation.
- Potential for harm · F2024-06-01 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to submit PBJ FY Quarter 1 2024 ([DATE]-[DATE]) for direct care staffing based on payroll data. The administrator reported 38 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 05/29/24 at 4:30 p.m., the administrator was asked about the PBJ report for the first quarter of 2024 ([DATE] - [DATE]). They reported it was not submitted within the required time frame. On 05/31/24 at 2:58 p.m., the administrator was asked about the facility's PBJ policy. They reported the policy was to complete them quarterly.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-06-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop, implement a policy and procedure for monitoring Legionella. The DON reported 38 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 05/31/24 at 9:25 a.m., the maintenance director was asked to submit a specific policy for measures to prevent the growth of Legionella. They did not provide any descriptions of the water systems for visible inspection and/or steps to prevent the growth of Legionella in a flow diagram. On 05/31/24 at 9:15 a.m., ADON/IP reported there had not been any cases of Legionella. On 05/31/24 at 9:45 a.m., the administrator and DON were asked to the submit policy and procedures to include diagrams to identify areas of potential outbreaks of Legionella. The administrator reported they did not have a policy and procedure related to Legionella.
- Potential for harm · E2024-06-01 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident assessment was transmitted within seven days of completion for one (#19) of one sampled resident reviewed for discharge assessments. The DON reported 38 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Minimum Data Set (MDS), policy and procedure, not dated read in part, .Our facility is committed to ensuring the accurate and timely completion of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for all residents, as required by federal and state regulations . On 05/30/24 at 9:30 a.m., the DON reviewed Res #19's MDS assessment. They reported there was a glitch in the system and the MDS coordinator did not receive a report that Res #19's MDS had not been submitted. They reported the MDS assessment was submitted yesterday. On 05/30/24 at 9:40 a.m., the DON notified the MDS coordinator on the phone via speaker. They reported they had a software issue with PCC. Reported they did not notice if it was on the report as accepted or rejected. They reported they modified the MDS because of the re-entry dates and transmitted the MDS…
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 before2024-06-01 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to update the plan of care related to documented falls for two (#22 and #29) of five sampled residents reviewed for falls. The DON reported 38 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Long Term Care Facility: Care Plan Policy and Procedure, not dated, read in part, .All residents will have a care plan that is resident-centered, addressing their medical, psychological, and social needs. Care plans will be developed, reviewed, and updated regularly in collaboration with residents, their families, and the interdisciplinary care team . Care interventions will be carried out as outlined in the care plan . A plan of care dated 12/12/23 through 06/12/23, documented, the resident is high risk for falls r/t Parkinson's disease. New Goal New Custom Goal: The resident will be free of falls through the review date. New Intervention: New Custom Intervention Anticipate and meet the resident's needs. Be sure the resident's call light is within reach and encourage…
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 · E2024-06-01 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement 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 the medication was necessary to treat a specific condition indicated in the clinical record for three (#7, 14, and #31) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The DON reported 38 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An Antipsychotic Medication Policy and Procedure for Long-Term Care, not dated, read in part, .Assessment and Indication: Clinical Indication: Antipsychotic medications should only be prescribed for residents with a diagnosed psychiatric disorder (e.g., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder) or for the management of severe behavioral symptoms associated with dementia when other interventions have failed . A facility document titled, Psychosis/Schizophrenia/Behaviors, not dated, read in part, Antipsychotic's require specific diagnosis and behavior monitoring . Res #7's diagnosis included other recurrent depressive disorders, delusional disorders, generalized anxiety, and restlessness and agitation. 1. A physician's order as of 05/09/24 read in part, Ativan 0.5 mg give by mouth every 6…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-04-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure expired medications were removed from the medication storage room and from the medication cart. The Resident Census and Condition of Residents, dated 04/13/23, form documented 42 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 04/13/23 at 9:00 a.m., during a tour of the medication room, two expired medications were observed. The medications included a bottle of Tums, for resident #36, with an expiration date of 7/22, and a bottle of Metformin 500 mg, in the Emergency Box, with an expiration date of 2/23. On 04/13/23 at 9:25 a.m., the medication cart was observed to have one expired medication, a bottle of Refresh eyes drops, for resident #7, expired 3/23. On 04/13/23 at 9:30 a.m., CMA #1 was asked how often staff checked for expired medications. The CMA stated, I haven't checked in about six months. On 04/13/23 at 10:00 a.m., the DON reported the pharmacist was supposed to be doing a check monthly for expired medications.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was revised for fall interventions for one (#23) of four sampled residents reviewed for falls. The Administrator reported a facility census of 42 residents. Findings: Resident #23 was admitted with diagnoses which included hypertension and seizure disorder. A Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 01/23/23, documented the resident was independent with ambulating and had two or more falls since admission. A nursing note, dated 12/01/22, documented the resident had a fall and was sent to the local hospital. The resident's seizure medication had been decreased. A nursing note, dated 12/01/22, documented the resident was moved to a room closer to the nurse's station .wheelchair in use. The resident was non-compliant with utilizing the call light for assistance. A nursing note, dated 12/01/22, documented a floor mat had been placed next to the bed in the lowest position .resident was found on the floor mat. A nursing note, dated 12/27/22, documented the resident's medication was adjusted and updated on the MAR. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-09-01 for 18 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in OK
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. 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 37E109. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-08, 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.