Purcell Care Center
801 North 6th Street, Purcell, OK 73080 · For profit - Individual · 105 certified beds · (405) 527-7798 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (65%) 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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 18.2% | 13.6% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.7% | 3.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.0% | 1.9% | 0.9% | typical for the state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 4.0% | 2.8% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.6% | 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 | 4.4% | 4.7% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.6% | 13.7% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 34.1% | 25.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.5% | 94.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.3% | 4.7% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.4% | 17.1% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 29.2% | 17.5% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.8% | 1.4% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.53 | 2.31 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.38 | 2.96 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.04 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 1% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.2%CMS range 7.2–18.4 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not 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 next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not 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 discharge | not 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 stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.09 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 105 beds and averages 51.6 residents a day — about 49% occupied, or roughly 53 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 3.40 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.28 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.20 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 3.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.48 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.32 to 0.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 65% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure supervision to prevent an elopement for 1 (#1) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for elopement. The ADON identified eight residents at risk for elopement.Findings:On 09/22/25 Residents #2 and #3, identified by the facility as elopement risks, were observed throughout the day. Neither resident showed any elopement behaviors. New elopement assessments were completed for both residents on 09/12/25.An undated facility policy titled Wandering and Elopements read in part, The facility will identify residents who are at risk of unsafe wandering and strive to prevent harm while maintaining the least restrictive environment for residents.Res #1 with known exit seeking behaviors eloped from the facility on 09/12/25 and was located down the road from the facility in a residential neighborhood. An undated medical diagnosis list showed Res #1 admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's and age-related decline.A quarterly assessment, dated 06/13/25, showed the resident's brief interview for mental status…
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 before2025-06-16 · 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 medications were administered according to physician orders for 1 (#1) of 6 residents sampled for timely administration of medications. The administrator identified 67 residents in the facility. Findings: An undated administration document showed medication pass for three times a day was from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., and 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. A policy titled Administering Medications, revised 04/2019, read in part, Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed .Medications are administered in accordance with the prescribed orders, including any time frame. An order summary report, dated 06/16/25, for Resident #1 showed: a. Metoprolol Succinate Extended Release (an antihypertensive), dated 10/01/23, 25mg in the morning for hypertension; b. Miralax (an osmotic laxative), dated 10/01/23, 17gm in the morning for constipation; c. Lisinopril (an ace inhibitor), dated 10/01/23, 20mg two times daily for HTN; d. Tramadol (an opioid), dated 11/03/23, 50mg three times…
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 · D2024-12-05 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 discontinued medications were discarded in a timely manner from the refrigerator for three (#25, 27, and #36) of three sampled residents reviewed for medication labeling and storage. The administrator identified 60 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Resident #25's physician's orders documented Trulicity (blood sugar medication) 4.5/0.5ml was discontinued on 05/13/24 and Dupixent (interleukin inhibitor) 300mg/2ml was discontinued on 04/10/24. 2. Resident #27's physician's orders documented formoterol nebulizer solution 20/2ml was discontinued on 07/12/24. 3. Resident #36's physician's orders documented Trulicity 1.5/0.5ml was discontinued on 03/08/24. On 11/04/24 at 11:30 a.m., items in the refrigerator in the medication room were reviewed with LPN #1. The following was observed: a. five unopened injector pens of Trulicity 1.5/0.5ml labeled for Resident #36, b. one unopened injector pen of Trulicity 4.5/0.5ml labeled for Resident #25, c. four unopened injector pens of Dupixent 300mg/2ml…
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 · D2024-09-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse within two hours for two (#1 and #2) of three sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The DON identified 54 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An abuse policy, dated 08/12/22, documented allegations of abuse must be reported within two hours. A progress note, dated 09/01/24 at 4:00 p.m., documented Res #1 had reported to staff Res #2 had been sexually inappropriate toward them. An initial incident report submitted to OSDH was dated as received 09/03/24 at 3:25 p.m. On 09/05/24 at 2:48 p.m., the administrator stated the incident report was submitted late.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-09 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — patternImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the physician of abnormal blood pressures for two (#3 and #5) of five sampled residents reviewed for changes in condition. The administrator identified 37 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. A facility Blood Pressure, Measuring policy, reviewed September 2010, documented in part .Hypertension is usually defined as blood pressure over 140/90 mm/Hg .Hypertension should be reported to the physician .Hypotension is defined as blood pressure less than 100/60 mm/Hg .Hypotension should be reported to the physician . Res #3 had diagnoses which included vascular dementia and secondary hypertension. A physician order, dated 10/01/23, documented to administer clonidine 0.1 mg by mouth three times per day, hold medication and notify physician of systolic blood pressure below 100. A MAR for December 2023 documented: a. 12/29/23 at 7:00 a.m. Res #3's blood pressure was 153/101, b. 12/29/23 at 2:00 p.m., Res #3's blood pressure was 153/101, c. 12/30/23 at 7:00 a.m., Res #3's blood pressure was 153/101, d. 12/30/23 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-09 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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 administer medications according to physician order for two (#3 and #5) of five sampled residents reviewed for changes in condition. The administrator identified 37 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. A facility Administering Mediations procedure, revised April 2019, documented in part .Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders .If a drug is withheld, refused, or given at a time other than the scheduled time, the individual administering the medication shall initial and circle the MAR space provided for that drug and dose .The individual administering the medication initials the resident's MAR on the appropriate line after giving each medication and before administering the next one . Res #3 had diagnoses which included vascular dementia, history of TIA, tremors, and secondary hypertension. A physician order, dated 10/01/23, documented to administer clonidine 0.1 mg by mouth three times per day, hold medication and notify physician of systolic blood pressure below 100. A physician order,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-19 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to administer insulin according to physician orders for two (#10 and #26) and failed to notify the physician for FSBS outside of ordered parameters for one (#26) of six residents sampled for medications. The ADON identified seven residents who received insulin. Findings: 1. Res #10 had diagnoses which included diabetes. A physician order, dated 06/22/23, documented to administer insulin deglu[DATE] units subcutaneously one time a day at 6:30 a.m. for DM. The order documented to notify PCP if FSBS is less than 60 or greater than 400 and document in progress notes, do not hold. A MAR for August 2023 documented the resident received their insulin greater than one hour after the ordered administration time one of 31 opportunities. A MAR for 09/01/23 through 09/05/23, documented the resident received their insulin greater than one hour after the ordered administration time for one of five opportunities, and greater than one hour before 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were followed during insulin administration. The ADON identified seven residents in the facility received insulin. Findings: On 09/15/23 at 10:40 a.m., LPN #1 was observed during insulin administration. Several insulin pre-filled metered dose syringes were observed stored in the top drawer of the medication cart on top of each other. The pens were labeled with several different resident's names. The pre-filled syringes were not individually packaged or wrapped. The LPN was observed taking a bottle of test strips into the room to perform a FSBS. The nurse was not observed sanitizing the bottle of test strips before returning it to the top drawer of the medication cart. On 09/15/23 at 10:49 a.m., LPN #1 was observed entering a residents room for insulin administration. The LPN was observed taking the same bottle of test strips into the room to perform a FSBS. The nurse was not observed sanitizing the test strip bottle before taking it into the room or after leaving the resident's room. 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-19 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately documented the status of residents for one (#26) of 16 sampled residents whose assessments were reviewed. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 09/14/23, documented 45 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Resident #23 had diagnoses which included depression, anxiety, and bipolar disorder. A State of Oklahoma Health Care Authority PASRR II evaluation, dated 01/12/22, documented the resident had a serious mental illness as defined by the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services. An annual assessment, dated 08/16/23, documented the resident was cognitively intact and required assistance with activities of daily living. The assessment documented the resident did not have a serious mental illness. On 09/19/23 at 11:33 a.m., the MDS coordinator was asked if the assessment was coded correctly concerning the PASRR II evaluation. They stated it was not.
- Potential for harm · E2022-05-05 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to have a weekend RN for eight hours a day. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report documented 30 residents lived in the facility. Findings: The daily staffing schedule for May 2022, did not document RN coverage on the weekends. On 05/05/22 at 11:00 a.m., the interim DON reported the facility had not had a weekend RN since 03/16/22.
- Potential for harm · D2022-05-05 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
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 include the recommendations from the PASRR Level II evaluation report into a resident's assessment and care planning for one (#22) of five residents reviewed for PASRR screening. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report documented 26 residents receiving psychoactive medications. Findings: Res #22's PASRR II evaluation, dated 08/30/16, documented the resident experiences a serious mental illness as defined by CMS. The evaluation documented to refer the resident to outpatient mental health services of his choice for ''Less than Specialized Mental Health Services. The evaluation documented the services should include: a. nursing facility training in health-care management, b. supportive counseling in the part of the nursing facility staff, c. nursing facility should obtain psychiatric records to clarify history, d. a guardian for decisions regarding health and safety, and e. minimum of an annual psychiatric evaluation and psychotropic…
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to IHS MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS — 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 2.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, 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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FORVIS MAZARS LLP | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 07/16/2019 |
| REED, BART | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 100% | since 07/16/2019 |
| LIVINGSTON, JEFF | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 07/16/2019 |
| IHS MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/16/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 88% 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 $479K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% 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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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
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.
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 375286. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-12-05, 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.