North Winds Living Center
3718 North Portland, Oklahoma City, OK 73112 · For profit - Corporation · 29 certified beds · (405) 942-1014 Medicaid only — no Medicare
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0610) — most recent May 2025
- inspectors recorded 2 serious findings 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 (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (56%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 2 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
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 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.
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 | 3.8% | 13.6% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.9% | 3.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.9% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.9% | 2.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.0% | 3.4% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.5% | 4.7% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 1.8% | 13.7% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 34.0% | 25.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.6% | 94.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 4.7% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 4.7% | 17.1% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 27.6% | 17.5% | 17.1% | 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 29 beds and averages 27.0 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.12 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.38 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.00 is below 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 3.23 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.07 on weekdays — about the same on weekends as weekdays. RN hours go from 0.31 to 0.56 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
17 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-05-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY On 05/12/25, a past non-compliance Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to protect a resident from psychosocial abuse for Resident #2. A nurse note, dated 02/13/25 at 4:00 p.m., showed Resident #79 was heard yelling come out your room mother [explicit]. The note showed Resident #79 stated, get out here faggot. The note showed LPN #1 approached Resident #79 who was repeating come the [explicit] out, I'm gonna [explicit] you up. The note showed Resident #79 was holding a wet floor sign in their hand, slinging it around, and attempting to get into another resident's room. The note showed the other resident did nothing and kept their door shut. The note showed Resident #79 threw the wet floor sign at the door which hit LPN #1 on the lower right leg. The note showed three staff attempted to calm them down. The note showed Resident #79 then picked up a chair and threw it towards the door. The note showed the nurse went and got the administrator and DON. The note…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-05-12 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY On 05/12/25, a past non-compliance Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to thoroughly investigate an allegation of abuse for Resident #2. A nurse note, dated 02/13/25 at 4:00 p.m., showed Resident #79 was heard yelling come out your room mother [explicit]. The note showed Resident #79 stated, get out here faggot. The note showed LPN #1 approached Resident #79 who was repeating come the [explicit] out, I'm gonna [explicit] you up. The note showed Resident #79 was holding a wet floor sign in their hand, slinging it around, and attempting to get into another resident's room. The note showed the other resident did nothing and kept their door shut. The note showed Resident #79 threw the wet floor sign at the door which hit LPN #1 on the lower right leg. The note showed three staff attempted to calm them down. The note showed Resident #79 then picked up a chair and threw it towards the door. The note showed the nurse went and got the administrator and DON. It…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-12 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's complete advance directive was included in their medical record for 1 (#2) of 16 sampled residents reviewed for advance directives. RN #1 identified 27 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An advance directive policy, revised 12/2016, read in part, Advance directives will be respected in accordance with state law and facility policy.Upon admission, the resident will be provided with written information concerning the right to refuse or accept medical or surgical treatment and to formulate an advance directive if he or she chooses to do so.Information about whether or not the resident has executed an advance directive shall be displayed prominently in the medical record. Resident #2's clinical record contained only one page of their advance directive, dated 04/24/18, which was part four general provisions. The rest of the advance directive was not included in the clinical record. An advance directive acknowledgement form, dated 01/27/24, showed Resident #2 had executed an advance directive. An…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 resident's oxygen tubing was changed according to the standard of practice and physician order for 1 (#18) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for oxygen use. RN #1 identified 27 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 05/04/25 at 8:40 a.m., Resident #18 was observed wearing oxygen. The tubing had a piece of tape with red writing that showed 3/23/25. On 05/08/25 at 10:01 a.m., Resident #18 was observed wearing oxygen. The tubing had a piece of tape with red writing that showed 3/23/25. Resident #18's physician order, dated 06/02/24, showed to Change oxygen tubing and humidifier bottles every week on Sunday 11/7 shift every night shift every Sunday. Resident #18's physician order, dated 01/15/25, showed Oxygen 2L/min via nasal cannula as needed. Resident #18's care plan, revised 01/22/25, showed oxygen at 2L per nasal cannula as needed. Resident #18's quarterly resident assessment, dated 04/13/25, showed oxygen use, and diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-12 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was not administered the wrong medications for 1 (#4) of 6 sampled residents reviewed for medication administration. RN #1 identified 27 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An administering medications policy, revised 04/2019, read in part, Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed.Medication errors are documented, reported, and reviewed by the QAPI committee to inform process changes and or the need for additional staff training. A medication error form for Resident #4, dated 02/07/25, read in part, at approximately [7:45 p.m.] acma came to this nurse and reported that a different resident's evening meds were missing, upon investigation this nurse found that meds were not missing they were given to this resident [Resident #4], and were administered at approximately [4:30 p.m.], vs obtained at [7:50 p.m.] t-97.3, bp- 120/77, p-83, resp even unlabored at 20, o2 sat 96% on r/a, fsbs-37 [error], resident alert and oriented to person, place and situation, as is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-12 · 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 EBP (Enhanced Barrier Precaution) signage was in place to ensure appropriate usage of PPE, for 1 (#24) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for infection control. RN #1 identified 27 residents resided in the facility. On 05/04/25 at 8:17 a.m., Resident #24 was observed in their room, on their bed under the covers, and did not respond to questions. No observation of EBP signage inside the residents room or anywhere outside of the residents room. On 05/05/25 at 12:33 p.m., there was no EBP signage on the outside of Resident #24's room/door. There was a three drawer plastic cabinet in the hall located next to the room which contained gowns, shields, masks, and gloves. Resident #24 stated the staff tape the port for showers. A resident admission assessment, dated 03/10/25, showed Resident #24 received dialysis, was cognitively intact with a BIMS of 15, and had diagnosis of end stage renal disease. A physicians order, dated 03/06/25, showed Enhanced Barrier Precautions every shift related to end stage renal…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-12 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to utilize an infection assessment screening to identify whether or not antibiotics were necessary for 2 (#6 and #10) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for antibiotic stewardship. The Resident Matrix, dated 05/04/25, showed 11 residents with infections resided in the facility. Findings: An infection prevention and control program policy, dated 05/12/23, read in part, An antibiotic stewardship program will be implemented as part of the overall infection prevention and control program .Antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use will be implemented as part of the antibiotic stewardship program. The January 2025 infection surveillance showed Resident #6 received zithromax (an antibiotic) 250 mg for an upper respiratory infection started on 01/16/25. It showed Resident #10 received azithromycin (an antibiotic) 250 mg started on 01/18/25. There were no laboratory results or infection assessment screening located in the residents' clinical record for the above antibiotic use. The February 2025 infection…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-15 · 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 had been developed/revised for a resident who received dialysis for one (#8) of 28 residents reviewed for care plans. The Resident Matrix dated 02/12/24, documented 28 residents resided in the facility. One resident received dialysis. Findings: A Care Planning policy, dated 01/01/24, read in part, A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident .Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the residents' conditions change . Resident #8 had diagnoses which included Chronic Kidney Disease. A physician order, dated 07/27/23, documented to monitor the dialysis port to right upper chest area for signs and symptoms of infection every shift. A physician order, dated 07/27/23 documented no blood pressure, labs or lifting in arm with the dialysis port every shift. A physician order, dated 07/28/23,…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-15 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolatedProvide 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's code status was identified in their health record for one (#19) of 16 sampled residents reviewed for code status. The Resident Matrix, dated 02/12/24, documented 28 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Resident #19 had diagnoses which included cerebral infarction and major depression. On 02/12/24 at 10:45 a.m., Resident #19's code status in their electronic health record was blank. On 02/12/24 at 1:08 p.m., LPN #1 stated residents' code status were found on their electronic health record and paper chart. They stated Resident #19 was a full code. On 02/12/24 at 1:13 p.m., LPN #1 stated Resident #19's code status on the electronic health record was blank and there was no physician order for a code status. On 02/12/24 at 1:17 p.m., the DON stated code status for residents were located on the electronic health record and there should be a physician's order for the code status. On 02/12/24 at 1:18 p.m., the DON stated the code status for Resident #19 on the electronic health record was blank and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-15 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure there was ongoing communication with the dialysis center and ongoing assessment of a resident before and after dialysis for one (#8) of one sampled resident reviewed for dialysis services. The Resident Matrix, dated 02/12/24, documented 28 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Hemodialysis Access Care policy, dated 09/10, read in part, .The general medical nurse should document in the resident's medical record every shift as follows: 1. Location of catheter. 2. Condition of dressing .3. If dialysis was done during shift. 4. Any part of report from dialysis nurse post-dialysis being given. 5. Observations post-dialysis. Resident #8 had diagnoses which included Chronic Kidney Disease. A physician order, dated 07/27/23, documented to monitor the dialysis port to right upper chest area for signs and symptoms of infection every shift. A physician order, dated 07/27/23 documented no blood pressure, labs or lifting in arm with the dialysis…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-15 · tag F0730 — isolatedObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete annual skills competency for two (CNA #1 and CNA #2) of two CNAs whose employee files were reviewed for skills competencies. The Resident Matrix, dated 02/12/24, documented 28 residents resided in the facility. There were four CNA's documented on the staff roster who had been employed over one year. Findings: The In-Service Training Program, Nurse Aide policy, revised 2019, read in part, .The facility completes a performance review of nurse aides at least every 12 months . CNA #1 was hired on 10/29/22. There was no annual skills competency in CNA #1's employee file for 2023. CNA #2 was hired on 12/28/15. There was no annual skills competency in CNA #2's employee file for 2023. On 02/14/24 at 11:49 a.m., the CNO stated CNA skill competencies were done annually. The CNO stated they were unable to locate the annual skill competencies for CNA #1 and CNA #2.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-15 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered for one (#2) of three sampled residents reviewed for medication administration. The Resident Matrix, dated 02/12/24, documented 28 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An Administering Medications policy, revised 04/19, read in part, .Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame medications are administered within one hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified . Resident #2 had diagnoses which included human immunodeficiency virus disease. A Physician Order, dated 01/11/24, documented darunavir oral tablet 600 mg give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to human immunodeficiency virus disease. On 02/13/24 at 8:54 a.m., darunavir was not available to be administered as ordered to Resident #2. ACMA #1 was observed to have ordered darunavir once it was determined to be unavailable. On 02/13/24 at 8:56 a.m., ACMA #1 stated it could take the pharmacy anywhere from a few hours to 10…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 5 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-20 · 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 ensure: A. Residents were offered the opportunity to take part in their care plan meeting for two (#17 and #19) of three sampled residents reviewed for care plan meetings and, B. Care plans were revised with each resident assessment for three (#1, 13 and #24) of nine sampled residents reviewed for care plan revision. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 01/17/23, documented 27 residents. Findings: The Care Planning-Interdisciplinary Team policy, revised September 2013, read in parts, .The resident, the resident's family and/or legal representative/guardian .are encouraged to participate in the development of and revisions to the resident's care plan .Every effort will be made to schedule care plan meetings at the best time of the day for the resident and family . The Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered policy, revised December 2016, read in parts, .Each resident's comprehensive person-centered care plan will be consistent…
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 · E2023-01-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 collaboration and coordination of care and services with hospice was provided for one (#4) of one sampled resident who was admitted to hospice services. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 01/17/23, documented two residents were receiving hospice care. Findings: The Hospice Program policy, revised July 2017, read in parts, Hospice services are available to residents at the end of life .it is the responsibility of the facility to meet the resident's personal care and nursing needs in coordination with the hospice representative, and ensure the level of care provided is appropriately based on the individual's needs .Coordinated care plans for residents receiving hospice services will include the most recent hospice plan of care as well as the care and services provided by our facility .The coordinated care plan shall be revised and updated as necessary to reflect the resident's current status to include but not limited to: Diagnosis .Problem list .Symptom management .Nutrition and hydration…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-20 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a significant change assessment was conducted for one (#4) of one sampled resident reviewed for hospice services. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 01/17/23, documented two residents were receiving hospice care. Findings: Resident #4 had diagnoses which included HIV, chronic pain syndrome, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, and chronic viral hepatitis C. A physician's order, dated 04/19/22, documented the resident was to be screened and evaluated by hospice. A progress note, dated 04/19/22, documented the resident had readmitted to facility and was placed on hospice. The clinical record had not contained a significant change assessment after the resident had been admitted to hospice. On 01/19/23 at 3:09 p.m., the DON was asked if a significant change assessment had been done. She reviewed the clinical record and stated, No.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-20 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments were accurate for one (#19) of nine sampled residents reviewed for resident assessments. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 01/17/23, documented 27 residents. Findings: A Resident Assessment policy, undated, read in parts, .The facility reviews the assessment of each resident once every [three] months If appropriate the resident's assessment is revised to assure the continued accuracy of the assessment . Resident #19 had diagnoses which included DM, HTN, and acute kidney failure. A Quarterly Resident Assessment, dated 10/19/22, documented the resident received tracheostomy care during the last 14 days while a resident in the facility and received insulin injections seven days of the seven day look back period. Resident #19's October 2022 MAR/TAR did not document the resident received tracheostomy care or insulin injections. On 01/18/23 at 9:55 a.m., the DON was asked who was responsible for completing resident assessments. She stated, I am. She was asked if Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop a care plan for hospice care for one (#4) of one sampled resident who was reviewed for hospice service. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 01/17/23, documented two residents were receiving hospice care. Findings: The Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered policy, revised December 2016, read in parts, A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident .The care plan interventions are derived from thorough analysis of the information gathered as part of the comprehensive assessment .The comprehensive, person-centered care plan is developed within seven (7) days of the completion of the required comprehensive assessment . Resident #4 had diagnoses which included HIV, chronic pain syndrome, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, and chronic viral hepatitis C. A physician's order, dated 04/19/22, documented the resident was to be screened and evaluated 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | 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 37E568. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-12, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.