The Gardens

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.

55.2% 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 65 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 54.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 63 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 48% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 107 beds and averages 62.1 residents a day — about 58% occupied, or roughly 45 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 3.65 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.33 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.10 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 3.49 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.71 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.39 to 0.18 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 69% 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.

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2024-09-13 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
  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 residents had access to their trust account money on nights and weekends for three (#3, 17, and #34) of three residents reviewed for access to their trust account money. The business office manager identified seven current residents who had money in the trust account. Findings: The facility policy Trust Fund Petty Cash Imprest Fund. read in part, .cash is disbursed to Residents from the trust fund petty cash imprest fund Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. daily, excluding weekends and holidays . On 09/11/24 at 9:26 a.m., Resident #34 stated they could not get money on weekends or at night, and they had to ask in advance if they wanted money on the weekends. On 09/10/24 at 1:42 p.m., Resident #17 stated they could not get money on the weekends because no one was at the facility to provide the money. Resident #17 stated if they wanted money for the weekend they would need to get it on Friday. On 09/13/24 at 9:32 a.m., Resident #3 stated they could not get money during the night and on the weekends because…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-09-13 · tag F0568 — pattern
  Properly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview the facility failed to provide notices to Medicaid recipients trust account holder when balances was within $200 of the resource limit for a medicaid recipient resident for two (#1 and #17) of three sampled residents reviewed for active trust account balances. The Business office manger identified seven residents that have money in the trust account, were current residents and had Medicaid as their payer source. Findings: The facility policy Notification of Certain Balances read in part, .It is the policy of this facility to notify Residents or their legal representatives when their trust fund balances approach the limits of Medicaid eligibility .written notification of trust fund balance .will be mailed/delivered to Residents or their legal representative . 1. A review of Resident #17 current trust account ledger balance documented the resident had a balance of $2,229.24 as of 09/11/2024. A review of Resident #17 face sheet indicated they had a payor source of Medicaid. There was no documentation to indicate the facility provided Resident #17…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-09-13 · tag F0569 — pattern
  Notify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
  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 close out trust accounts and convey funds within 30 days for three (#108, 109, 110 and #11) of four residents reviewed for open trust accounts and had been discharged from the facility over 30 days. The Business Office Director identified eight residents who no longer resided in the facilty and trust accounts were not closed out within 30 days. Findings: The facility policy Conveyance of Funds Upon a Residents Death read in part, .It is the policy of this facility that upon death of a Resident with personal funds on deposit with the facility, the facility will promptly convey such funds, along with a final accounting of such funds .accounting will be made within thirty (30) days of the death . The facility policy Closing Resident Fund Accounts and Release of Funds read in part, .It is the policy of this facility to release to a resident or his/her representative the Residents trust funds upon discharge, transfer or resident request the facility will…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-13 · 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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to perform hand hygiene during wound care and follow enhanced barrier precautions during wound care for one (Res #36) of three sampled residents reviewed for wounds. The administrator identified 61 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A hand washing/hand hygiene policy documented staff should cleanse their hands before applying non-sterile gloves and after removing gloves Res #36 had diagnoses which included diabetes, hypertension, presence of ostomy, and neuropathic bladder. On 09/12/24 at 10:09 a.m., LPN #1 was observed performing wound care for Res #36. The LPN did not perform hand hygiene after removing soiled gloves and before donning new gloves. The LPN was not wearing a PPE gown. On 09/12/24 at 10:18 a.m., LPN #1 stated they should have cleaned their hands between clean and dirty gloves. On 09/13/24 at 8:44 a.m., LPN #1 stated Res #36 was on enhanced barrier precautions because they have a foley and ostomy. They stated they did not follow enhanced barrier precautions during wound care on 09/12/24.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-13 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  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 a U-bar was accommodated for residents needs for two (#158 and #164) of two sampled residents who wanted the rail for steadying and repositioning. The Administrator identified 61 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A policy, titled, bed safety, documented, .side rails may be used if assessment and consultation with the Attending Physician has determined that they are needed to help manage a medical symptom or condition, or to help the resident reposition or move in bed and transfer, and no other reasonable alternatives can be identified . A resident council form, dated 08/01/24, docmented, .issue presented .U-bars removed per state regulation .response .evaluation and consent . On 09/10/24 at 12:14 p.m., resident #164 stated they needed railings to turn while in bed. They also stated they were blind so the railings could assist with perception. On 09/11/24 at 8:54 a.m., resident #158's family stated they wanted them to have a u bar since they were unsteady and for repositioning since they had…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-13 · tag F0623 — isolated
  Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
  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 a resident's representative of an involuntary discharge for one (#55) of three sampled residents reviewed for closed records. The administrator identified 61 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A facility Transfer or Discharge, Emergency policy documented in the event of an emergency transfer or discharge the representative or other family member should be notified. Res #55 had diagnoses which included Parkinsonism Res #55 was involuntarily discharged from the facility on 06/21/24. On 09/13/24 at 8:36 a.m., the social services director stated they had started Res #55's discharge because they had started to be aggressive with staff. They stated the administrator and DON had taken over the discharge because there were complications with the family. On 09/13/24 at 10:05 a.m., the administrator stated Res #55 was discharged because the facility could not meet their needs. They stated the resident had been approved at a facility that had required an evaluation to ensure the patient was medically stable for…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-13 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate 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

  Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a newly identified diagnosis of psychosis and hallucination after admission, submitted a PASRR with the new diagnosis for one (#34) of two sampled residents reviewed for pre-admission screening and resident review. MDS Coordinator #1 identified 35 residents who currently had a diagnosis of a serious mental health condition. Findings: Resident # 34 had a level one pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) completed on 07/22/22 with a primary diagnosis of neuropathy and a secondary of obesity. The level one did not indicate Resident #34 had a serious mental health diagnosis. A review of the care plan, and the current diagnosis list with onset dates, indicated the resident had new diagnosis of psychosis and hallucinations on 03/27/2024. A review of the clinical record contained no PASARR with the new serious mantel health diagnosis of hallucinations and psychosis. On 09/12/24 at 10:20 a.m. Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator #1, stated they were responsible for completing…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-13 · tag F0661 — isolated
  Ensure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview the facility failed to document a discharge summary for one (#55) of three sampled residents reviewed for closed records. The administrator identified 61 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Res #55 was discharged from the facility on 06/21/24. A discharge summary was not documented in the EHR. On 09/13/24 at 12:11 p.m., the administrator stated there was no discharge summary for Res #55.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-07-19 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
  Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
  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 physician received monthly drug regimen reviews, and acted upon recommendations by the pharmacist, for two (#2 and #34) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The Resident Census and Condition of Residents form, dated 07/17/23, documented 48 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A facility policy, Medication Regimen Reviews, revised 2007, documented in part, .The primary purpose of this review is to help the facility maintain each resident's highest practicable level of functioning by helping them utilize medications appropriately .The Consultant Pharmacist will provide the Director of Nursing Services and Medical Director with a written, signed and dated copy of the report, listing the irregularities found and recommendations for their solutions .Copies of drug/medication regimen review reports, including physician responses, will be maintained as part of the permanent medical record . 1. Resident #2 had diagnoses which included chronic respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2022-01-12 · 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 residents received their showers/baths as scheduled for three (#13, 32, and #34) of three sampled residents who were reviewed for showers/baths. The administrator identified 10 residents who were dependent on staff for bathing. Findings: 1. Resident (Res) #13 had diagnoses which included epilepsy, abnormalities of gait and mobility, weakness, lack of coordination, anxiety, depression, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. The care plan, dated 04/29/21, read in parts, .Focus .I require assistance with adls .Interventions .assist me with bathing as needed . The quarterly MDS assessment, dated 10/29/21, documented the resident was cognitively intact, utilized a wheelchair for mobility, and required physical help with part of bathing activity. On 01/10/22 at 11:28 a.m., Res #13 stated she had not received a shower since 12/24/21. A review of Res #13's electronic clinical record revealed documentation of one bath in the last 30 days. A review of the shower schedule provided by the facility revealed Res #13's showers/baths were…

  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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PHOENIX HEALTHCARE — 6 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 17 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

This home reported $621K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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