Sequoyah Pointe Living Center

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

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.

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.

42.7% 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 35 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 65.7% 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 35 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 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 59% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 92 beds and averages 35.1 residents a day — about 38% occupied, or roughly 57 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.43 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.26 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.47 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.29 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.49 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.26 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 63% 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

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2025-04-15 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure food served from the kitchen was palatable and served at an appetizing temperature. The DON identified 36 residents who ate from the kitchen. Findings: On 04/08/25 at 12:40 p.m., Residents #10 and #31 were observed sitting together in the dining room with their food uneaten. On 04/08/25 at 1:32 p.m., a test tray was delivered. The food was observed to not be hot, the cake was dry and crumbling off the fork, and the steak finger breading was observed to be white in color and to touch was gooey and not thoroughly cooked. On 04/08/25 at 11:10 a.m., Resident #9 stated the food was lousy, everything from seasoning to how it was prepared. They stated the facility served noodles and rice often and the chicken fried steak fingers were too tough and they could not cut or eat it. On 04/08/25 at 11:16 a.m., Resident #90 stated the food was always cold and bland. They stated they always eat in their room. On 04/08/25 at 12:40 p.m., Residents #10 and #31 were sitting together in the dining room. They stated the food was tough 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure bathing was provided to 1 (#33) of 3 sampled residents who were reviewed for activities of daily living. The DON identified 38 residents resided at the facility. Findings: Resident #33's significant change assessment, dated 03/13/25, showed the resident had a BIMS of 15 which indicated they were cognitively intact for daily decision making. The assessment showed Resident #33 was dependent for showers. The assessment listed diagnoses which included periprosthetic fracture around internal prosthetic left knee joint and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of the bathing task for March showed Resident #33 had received one shower out of 13 opportunities in March on 03/26/25. A task flow sheet for showers, dated April 2025, showed Resident #33 was to receive showers Monday, Wednesday and Friday. The flow sheet showed one shower in the month of April on 04/04/25 out of five opportunities. On 04/09/25 at 9:32 a.m., Resident #33 stated they had previously been showered three times a week, but would prefer a…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  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 weights were completed as ordered for 1 (#92) of 1 resident sampled who was reviewed for weights. The administrator identified 38 residents who resided at the facility. Findings: Resident #92's admission assessment, dated 04/05/25, showed the resident had a BIMS of 13 which indicated their cognition was intact. The assessment listed diagnoses which included acute on chronic congestive heart failure and end stage renal disease. Resident #92's care plan, dated 04/05/25, showed a concern for decreased cardiac output but did not have an intervention for the monitoring of weight. A physician's order, dated 04/06/25, showed to obtain daily weight one time a day. Review of the treatment administration record, dated April 2025, showed weights were obtained three times out of ten opportunities. The record showed four dates were documented with NA (not applicable) and one blank. Review of progress notes did not show an explanation was provided for why the weights were not obtained. Review of the weights for Resident #92…

  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 · D2025-04-15 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
  Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
  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 laboratory services were provided for 1 (#92) of 1 sampled resident who was reviewed for laboratory services. The administrator identified 38 residents who resided at the facility. Findings: Resident #92's admission assessment, dated 04/05/25, showed they resident had a BIMS of 13 which indicated their cognition was intact. The assessment listed diagnosis which included end stage renal disease. Resident #92's care plan, dated 04/05/25, showed a concern for dialysis related to end stage renal disease. The care plan interventions were to obtain and monitor lab/diagnostic work as ordered and to report significant results to the physician. A physician's order, dated 04/05/25, showed to obtain a CBC (complete blood count), CMP (comprehensive metabolic panel), TSH (thyroid stimulating hormone), BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide), and pre-albumin one time only for monitoring. No lab results were recorded in the clinical record. No lab results were provided by the end of the survey. Review of an April 2025 lab administration…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-07-31 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — pattern
  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 the residents' right to be free of abuse for two (#1 and #2) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility's Resident List Report documented 44 residents lived in the facility. Findings: A resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation prevention program policy, revised April 2021, documented the policy's objectives were: - to protect residents from abuse by anyone, including facility staff and other residents; - to establish and maintain a culture of compassion and caring for all residents and particularly those with behavioral, cognitive, or emotional problems; and -to protect residents from any further harm during the investigations. 1. Resident #2 had diagnoses which included encephalopathy, dementia, and stroke. The quarterly assessment, dated 06/03/24, documented Resident #2 was severely impaired in cognition and utilized a wheelchair for mobility. A State Reportable Incident Report, dated 07/28/24, read in part the facility staff observed Resident #1 had their hand down the pants of…

  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 · E2024-06-07 · 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 — 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 have the participation of the resident or the resident representative in the development of the resident's person centered care plan for three (#1, 2, and #3) of three residents whose care plans were reviewed. The facility's Resident List Report documented 46 residents. Findings: 1. Resident #1 was admitted [DATE] and had diagnoses which included aphasia and psychotic disorder with delusions. On 06/03/24 at 4:25 p.m., a family member was interviewed and stated they were not notified of or offered an opportunity to participate in the resident's care plan meetings. On 06/04/24, the resident's clinical record was reviewed. There was no documentation the resident or resident's representative participated in the care planning process for the resident's admission assessment (11/27/23) or quarterly assessment (02/27/24). 2. Resident #2 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's dementia and dementia with behaviors. On 06/04/24, the…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-12-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure showers were provided for two (#7 and #11) of three residents reviewed for bathing. The administrator reported the census was 42. Findings: 1. Resident #7 had diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and anemia. An admission assessment, dated 06/02/23, documented Resident #7 was moderately impaired in cognition and required assistance with bathing. A review of Resident #7's shower documentation sheets did not document the resident had been offered a shower between 10/2/23 and 10/26/23 or between 11/10/23 and 12/07/23. On 10/06/23 at 10:30 a.m., Resident #7 stated if a shower aide was not working, they usually did not get a shower. 2. Resident #11 had diagnoses which included diabetes mellitus and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An annual assessment, dated 10/05/23, documented Resident #11 was intact in cognition. A review of Resident #11's shower documentation sheets did not document the resident had been offered a shower between 09/12/23 and 09/25/23 or between 11/09/23 and 11/27/23. On…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2023-12-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to have a program designed to help prevent the development of Legionellosis and Pontiac fever caused by Legionella Bacteria. The administrator reported the census was 42. Findings: An undated facility policy, titled Legionella Surveillance and Detection, read in part, .The water management program includes the following elements .A detailed description and diagram of the water system in the facility .The identification of areas in the water system that could encourage the growth and spread of Legionella or other waterborne bacteria . On 12/08/23 at 8:18 a.m., the maintenance supervisor stated the facility did not have a detailed description and diagram of the facility water supply and had not identified areas in the water system that could encourage the growth of Legionella. They also stated that no water management team had been assembled.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-12-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure indwelling catheters were changed according to the physician's orders for one (#1) of one resident reviewed for catheter care. The DON reported three residents in the facility had indwelling urinary catheters. Findings: Resident #1 had diagnoses which included multiple sclerosis and neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder. A physician order, dated 10/01/23, documented to change Resident #1's catheter every month on the 2nd and as needed. Review of the TAR and nurse notes did not document the catheter was changed on 10/02/23, 11/02/23 or 12/02/23. On 12/11/23 at 9:40 a.m., LPN #2 stated catheters should be changed according to physician orders.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-12-11 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident who received dialysis treatment were routinely assessed after dialysis treatments for one (#12) of two sampled resident reviewed for dialysis care. The DON reported two resident at the facility received dialysis treatments. Findings: A facility policy titled, End-Stage Renal Disease, Care of a Resident with [title ends abruptly], read in part, .Residents with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) will be care for according to currently recognized standards of care . Resident #12 had diagnoses which included chronic kidney disease, end stage renal disease, and dependence on renal dialysis. Sixteen documents titled Pre/Post Dialysis Communication Report, dated on and between 10/17/23 and 12/07/22 were reviewed. Ten of those forms, dated 10/17/23, 10/21/23, 11/09/23, 11/18/23, 11/20/23, 11/25/23, 11/30/23, 12/02/23, 12/05/23, and 12/07/23, did not include a completed post dialysis treatment assessment of Resident #12. On 12/08/23 at 9:06 a.m., Resident #12 was observed watching televisions in their…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

$52,192 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• $52,192 — penalty dated 2023-12-11
• Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-02-24 for 17 days

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CONHOLD — 5 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

About 75% 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 $380K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

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