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

McAlester Nursing & Rehab

615 E Morris Ave, McAlester, OK 74501 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 63 certified beds · (918) 426-4010 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited May 20261 immediate-jeopardy citation1 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$17,193 in federal fines
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2026
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $17,193 in federal fines (most recent 2024-11-21)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (64%) runs well above the national median (45%)
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2206 N Main St · (918) 420-9340 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
2009 N Main St · (918) 302-9996 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2719 N Main St · (918) 426-4587 · Call to confirm hours
Park
2701 N 4th 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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 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 fell from 3 to 2 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 rating2★
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 increased17.4%13.6%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.8%3.3%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.9%1.9%0.9%typical
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%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 injury4.6%4.7%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened15.6%13.7%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication18.2%25.7%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.6%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.3%4.7%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control22.2%17.1%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table35.0%17.5%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.8%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.3%74.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission42.3%27.3%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit30.3%16.6%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.972.311.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.302.961.80worse

* 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.

48.7% 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 45 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

48.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
65.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.19U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 65.0% 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 20 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 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 21% 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 SNF48.7%CMS range 35.0–67.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.1%CMS range 8.7–16.910.7%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 discharge65.0%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 discharge50.0%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 discharge65.0%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 identified94.4%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 settingnot 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 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 stay0.0%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 worsened5.6%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 hospitalization8.0%CMS range 4.5–14.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.061.02Oct 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

RN hours/ resident / day
LPN hours/ resident / day
Aide hours/ resident / day
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
RN hoursweekends
64.4%
Total nursing turnover
83.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 63 beds and averages 49.4 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 14 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.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.65 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.30 to 0.18 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 64% is well above the national median of 45%. 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

8
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-07-31)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2023-06-28)

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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-11-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY An IJ was identified from 11/17/24 through 11/21/24. The deficient practice remained at isolated level of a potential for harm. On 11/21/24, an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to to provide adequate supervision to prevent elopement for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and elopement seeking behaviors, and to educate staff on how to identify residents at risk for elopement. On 11/17/24, Resident #1 was reported missing from the facility and found one block away from a driver passing by. Resident #1 stepped off the curb and fell to their knees and was transported to the ER. This resulted in Resident #1 acquiring a closed head injury, laceration of the face requiring sutures, and an abrasion of the knee. On 11/21/24 at 2:45 p.m., the Oklahoma State Department of Health was notified and verified the existence of an IJ situation. On 11/21/24 at 2:51 p.m., the administrator and DON were notified of the IJ situation and the IJ template was provided.…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2023-12-11 · 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 free from abuse for one (#1) of three residents sampled for abuse. Two staff members witnessed CNA #1 slap and curse Res #1 on 12/06/23 evening shift. The facility had put measures in place to correct the deficiency on 12/06/23. The administrator identified 45 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: Res #1 had diagnoses which included dementia with agitation and metabolic encephalopathy. A quarterly MDS assessment, dated 10/06/23, documented the resident was cognitively impaired, required supervision to touch assistance with transfers, and independent with a manual wheelchair. An incident report, dated 12/06/23, documented staff witnessed CNA #1 slap Res #1 twice to the head with open hand in the west hallway. A statement by CNA #1, dated 12/06/23, read in entirety, I went to [Res #2 name withheld] room [Res #1 name withheld] was in there [Res #2] was trying to hit [Res #1] with walker and I go to remove [Res #1] from the room and he hit me in the jaw as I was removing him he hit me again. I…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2026-05-19 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    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 the shower curtain was kept clean and ceiling tiles were in good repair for 1 (east hall shower room) of 2 shower rooms observed.The administrator identified 25 residents used the east hall shower room. Findings:On 05/19/26 at 12:39 p.m., the east hall shower room was observed to have a grey and white shower curtain hanging with spots of black discoloration (too numerous to count) and two ceiling tiles with brown rings and water damage.A Laundry and Bedding, Soiled policy, revised 11/2010, read in part, shower linen ie curtains .shall be laundered as needed.A Bathrooms_Showers policy, revised 02/2021, read in part, showers . are cleaned and disinfected daily, shower linen is to be laundered monthly or when residue is noticed in accordance with our established procedures. On 05/19/26 at 12:45 p.m., maintenance #1 stated the black discoloration on the shower curtain looked like mold or mildew.On 05/19/26 at 12:47 p.m., maintenance #1 pointed at the damaged ceiling tiles and stated, Those are water leaks,…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-19 · 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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from sexual abuse for 1 (#2) of 4 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The DON identified 43 residents resided in the facility.Findings:1. On 05/18/26 at 12:25 p.m., Resident #2 was observed sitting in a wheelchair in a common area. The resident was clean and dressed for the day. Resident #2 did not verbally respond when spoken to, just smiled. Resident #2 did not have any visible bruises or wounds noted. Staff approached Resident #2 and spoke in a calm pleasant manner. Resident #2 smiled at the staff and did not appear fearful.An undated admission report showed Resident #2 had diagnoses which included frontotemporal neurocognitive disorder, focal traumatic brain injury, cognitive social or emotional deficit, and speech and language deficit.A quarterly assessment for Resident #2, dated 02/24/26, showed the resident had a BIMS of 3 (which indicated they were severely impaired in cognition) and did not have behaviors. 2. An undated admission record showed Resident #1 had diagnoses…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2024-07-31 · tag F0641 — pattern
    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 Resident Assessments were accurately coded for two (#39 and #50) of 13 sampled residents reviewed for accurate assessments. The Administrator identified 43 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Resident #39 had diagnoses which included hepatic encephalopathy, metabolic encephalopathy, and cirrhosis of the liver. Resident #39's physical therapy treatment notes documented they received services on 06/26/24, 06/27/24, and 07/01/24. A Quarterly Resident Assessment, dated 07/01/24, documented Resident #39 did not receive physical therapy services. On 07/30/24 at 3:22 p.m., MDS Coordinator #1 stated they would code a resident received therapy services in section O of the Resident Assessment. They stated therapy brought them a log to identify what residents had received therapy services. They stated no therapy services were coded on Resident #39's assessment. MDS Coordinator #1 reviewed Resident #39's physical therapy records and stated the 06/26, 06/27, and 07/01/24 physical therapy services should have 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-07-31 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
    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 a care plan was updated related to an unstageable pressure ulcer for one (#152) of 12 sampled residents reviewed for care plans. The Administrator identified 43 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Resident #152 had diagnosis which included unstageable pressure ulcer. A nursing note, dated 07/18/24, documented Resident #152 had readmitted to the facility with a 5.0 cm in length by 3.0 cm in width by 0.1 cm in depth moisture associated wound to their right buttock. A Physician's order, dated 07/26/24, documented, clarification order clean unstageable area on buttock with wound wash, pat dry, apply hydrogel and collagen. cover area with foam dressing every day and PRN x 14 days then re-evaluate. There was no documentation of Resident #152's unstageable pressure ulcer in the care plan. On 07/31/24 at 9:39 a.m., MDS Coordinator #1 stated they had not updated the care plan since Resident #152 had returned from the hospital.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-07-31 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation of blood pressure for one (#6) of five sampled residents observed for medication pass. The administrator identified 43 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Nursing Care Policies and Procedures, for blood pressures, revised 05/18/01, documented, A blood pressure measurement is taken to accurately determine the blood pressure to assist in diagnosis and to show progress and change in a resident's condition. Resident #6 admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses which included essential hypertension and tachycardia. A Physician's order, dated 06/08/24, documented metoprolol tartrate give 25 mg twice daily, hold if SBP is less than 110. On 07/31/24 at 10:08 a.m., LPN #1 obtained Resident #6's blood pressure with a wrist cuff. the blood pressure reading was 101/52 with a pulse of 101. On 07/31/24 at 10:09 a.m., LPN #1 stated, I always round up so it is 102/52. On 07/31/24 at 10:10 a.m., LPN #1 documented 102/52…

    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 · D2024-07-31 · tag F0574 — isolated
    The resident has the right to receive notices in a format and a language he or she understands.
    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 information on how to file a formal complaint with the State agency was visible to the residents. The Administrator identified 43 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 07/30/24 at 10:05 a.m., a meeting with the Resident Council Group was held. They stated they had not been informed of their right and given information on how to formally complain to the State about the care they were receiving. On 07/30/24 at 10:39 a.m., the Long Term Care Facility Complaint Procedure form was observed on a brown board next to the dining room. Only the top part of the form was visible. A plastic sleeve that contained survey results was observed covering the bottom half of the form. There was no contact information, mailing address, e-mail address, or telephone number for filing a formal complaint to the State viewable. On 07/30/24 at 11:02 a.m., Social Services stated they went over resident rights and how to file a grievance during Resident Council meetings. They stated as far as with the State agency, 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-31 · tag F0577 — isolated
    Allow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
    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 residents had access to the most recent survey results conducted by State surveyors. The Administrator identified 43 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A complaint investigation was conducted at the facility on 12/11/23. On 07/30/24 at 10:05 a.m., a meeting with the Resident Council Group was held. They stated they did not know how to access the results of the State inspections. They stated the facility had not informed them. On 07/30/24 at 10:39 a.m., there were State survey results observed in a clear plastic sleeve on a brown board next to the dining room. There was no sign indicating these were the State survey results. The survey results located inside were dated 06/28/23. On 07/30/24 at 10:52 a.m., the survey results for the 12/11/23 complaint survey conducted at the facility were not observed in the clear plastic sleeve. On 07/30/24 at 10:57 a.m., Social Services stated survey results were usually posted up by one of the west doors. Social Services stated they honestly didn't share…

    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 · D2024-07-31 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolated
    Provide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
    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 resident's code status was updated in the care plan for one (#38) of 12 sampled residents reviewed for code status. The Administrator identified 43 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered policy, revised December 2016, documented assessments of residents were ongoing and care plans were revised as information about the residents and the residents' conditions changed and when a resident had been readmitted to the facility from a hospital stay. Resident #38 admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which include myocardial infarction and atherosclerotic heart disease of the native coronary artery without angina pectoris. A Care Plan, dated 05/03/24, documented Resident #38 had chosen a full code and staff were to follow full code protocol. A Physician's order, dated 06/27/24, documented Resident #38's code status as DNR. Resident #38's chart had an orange sticker on the front and the side that 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-31 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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 not left at a resident's bedside for one (#39) of 16 residents observed for bedside medications. The Administrator identified 43 residents resided in the facility. The DON identified no residents with orders to self-administer medications. Findings: A Medication Storage in the Facility policy, revised 08/14, read in part, .Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly .Only licensed nurses, pharmacy personnel, and those lawfully authorized to administer medications .permitted to access medications . Resident #39 had diagnoses which included hepatic encephalopathy, metabolic encephalopathy, and cirrhosis of the liver. Resident #39's July 2024 Physician Order's did not contain an order to self-administer medications. On 07/28/24 at 9:37 a.m., Resident #39 stated they noticed a white pill they hadn't been taking during medication pass. They stated the staff was going to go and see what the medication was. Resident #39 stated the staff reported it was oxxybutynin,…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure meat products were thawed in a manner to prevent cross-contamination for one of two kitchen observations. The Administrator identified 43 residents resided in the facility. The DON identified one resident who received nothing by mouth. Findings: A Food Receiving and Storage policy, revised 10/17, read in part, Foods shall be received and stored in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices .Uncooked and raw animal products and fish will be stored separately in drip-proof containers . On 07/28/24 at 9:00 a.m., there was a grey container observed on the bottom shelf of the walk in cooler. There was one clear wrapped container of meat labeled ground beef that was dated 07/11/24. In the same container, there were two partially frozen hams with a use by date of 10/29/24. There was a red liquid substance noted at the bottom of the container the meats were stored in. On 07/28/24 at 9:10 a.m., the Dietary Manager stated the meats were supposed to be separated. They stated both items required…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-28 · tag F0640 — pattern
    Encode 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 ensure resident MDS assessments were transmitted to CMS in the required time frame for three (#10, 24, and #37) of three residents sampled for MDS transmission. The Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 06/28/23, documented a census of 43 residents. Findings: A CMS Submission Report, dated 06/27/23, documented an annual assessment for Res #10 with a target date of 04/16/23 was transmitted on 06/27/23, an annual assessment for Res #24 with a target date of 05/07/23 was transmitted on 06/27/23, and an annual assessment for Res #37 with a target date of 04/19/23 was transmitted on 06/27/23. On 06/27/23 at 3:30 p.m., the MDS coordinator reported the resident assessments were transmitted by the corporate office. The MDS coordinator reported the resident assessments for Res #10, #24, and #37 should have been transmitted within the 14 day required time frame.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-28 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure insulin was held and blood sugars were obtained per physician's orders for one (#6) of one resident reviewed for diabetic care. The DON identified six residents with orders for insulin. Findings: Res #6 was admitted with diagnoses which included diabetes. A physician order, dated 01/14/22, documented to inject Novolog (Insulin to lower blood sugar) 10 U SQ TID at 0700, 1130 and 1630. Hold if FSBS below 110. A physician order, dated 11/08/22, documented to check FSBS AC (before meals) & HS (bedtime). The Finger Stick Blood Sugar and Injection log for April 2023 documented the following: On 04/01/23 at 4:00 p.m. - FSBS (blood sugar) was 90 and insulin was administered. On 04/09/23 at 4:00 p.m. - No FSBS reading was documented and insulin was administered. On 04/22/23 at 8:00 p.m. - No FSBS reading was documented On 04/23/23 at 4:00 p.m. & 8:00 p.m. - No FSBS reading was documented On 04/28/23 at 4:00 p.m. & 8:00 p.m. - No FSBS reading was documented On 04/29/23 at 6:00 a.m. - No FSBS reading was documented On 04/30/23…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-28 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    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 oxygen tubing and humidifier bottles were labeled per physician orders for three (#13, 26 and #28) of three sampled residents reviewed for oxygen therapy. The DON identified six residents on oxygen therapy. Findings: 1. Res #13 had diagnoses which included COPD and pulmonary hypertension. A physician order, dated 05/25/23, documented to change O2 concentrator humidifier bottle weekly on Sunday 10-6 shift and PRN and date bottle. A physician order, dated 05/25/23, documented to change O2 tubing weekly on Sunday 10-6 shift and PRN if contaminated and date O2 tubing. On 06/26/23 at 9:00 a.m., Res #13's oxygen was in use with tubing and humidifier bottle not labeled or dated. On 06/27/23 at 8:45 a.m., Res #13's oxygen was in use with tubing and humidifier bottle not labeled or dated. 2. Res #26 had diagnoses which included chronic lung disease. A hospice order, dated 05/27/23, documented to provide oxygen 3L via NC continuously. On 06/27/23 at 8:37, Res #26 was observed with oxygen at 3L per NC, there 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-28 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed for one (#13) of one resident sampled with a skin condition and one (#26) of one sampled resident with oxygen therapy. The DON identified one resident who had psoriasis (a skin condition) and six residents with oxygen therapy. Findings: 1. A physician order, dated 05/30/23, documented betamethasone (a steroid cream) 0.05% apply topically to affected areas twice daily as needed for psoriasis. A physician order, dated 05/30/23, documented Stelara (immunosuppressant drug) 90mg/ml inject one ml SQ every 12 weeks. On 06/26/23 at 12:45 p.m., Res #13 was observed to have large red areas on their torso, both arms, and legs. Res #13 was scratching and picking at the red areas. Res #13 reported they had psoriasis and stated, it has flared up and is bad. There was no care plan for Res #13's psoriasis. On 06/28/23 at 9:15 a.m., the MDS coordinator reported Res #13's psoriasis had been care planned and Res #13's skin had improved so the care plan was resolved. The MDS Coordinator also…

    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

“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

$17,193 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $9,750 — penalty dated 2024-11-21
  • $7,443 — penalty dated 2023-12-11

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 BRADFORD MONTGOMERY — 11 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 1 of 52.2-1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.4-1.4 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 52.9-0.9 vs chain
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.2★, 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
MONTGOMERY, BRADFORDIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 05/08/2017
SANDMANN, DANAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/01/2017

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.

$3.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-1.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$534K
Related-party expense14% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 80%Medicare 11%Other / private 10%

About 80% 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 $534K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

$240per resident / day
operating cost
$7,293per 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 375487. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-07-31, 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