Spiro Nursing Home, Inc.
401 South Main, Spiro, OK 74959 · For profit - Corporation · 95 certified beds · (918) 962-2308 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
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) | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 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 improved from 3 to 4 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 | 14.9% | 13.6% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 3.3% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 1.9% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.4% | 2.8% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 3.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.6% | 0.1% | 0.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.5% | 4.7% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.6% | 13.7% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.5% | 25.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.2% | 94.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.0% | 4.7% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 14.8% | 17.1% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.5% | 17.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.8% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 78.3% | 74.1% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 37.9% | 27.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 27.5% | 16.6% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.90 | 2.31 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.03 | 2.96 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
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 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 18% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| 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 | 96.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care 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 | 9.7% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 9.7% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.8%CMS range 3.4–13.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.49 | 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 95 beds and averages 51.0 residents a day — about 54% occupied, or roughly 44 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 3.91 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.37 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.69 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 3.38 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.13 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.29 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
9 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2022-12-08 · 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
On 12/06/22, an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to ensure Res #5 was free from burns while drinking coffee. On 12/06/22 at 3:15 p.m., the Oklahoma State Department of Health was notified and verified the existence of the IJ situation. On 12/06/22 at 3:25 p.m., the Administrator was notified of the IJ situation. On 12/06/22 at 4:25 p.m., an acceptable plan of removal was submitted to the Oklahoma State Department of Health. The facility's plan of removal, dated 12/06/22 at 4:25 p.m., read in parts: .We identified 10 resident who require assistance with feeding that would have the possibility of burning themselves with coffee. Any new admission who are assessed to require assistance with feeding will be added to this list. To prevent these issues in the future staff will put approximately 2 tablespoons of ice in the coffee of all residents who require assistance with feeding. The staff will check the coffee temperatures before and after the ice to ensure that the temperature is below 120 degrees. The dietary manager has…
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 · E2025-06-03 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 were provided with a written notice of transfer and a copy of the bed hold policy when they transferred to a hospital for 1 (#42) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for hospitalizations. The ADON stated 22 separate residents have been transferred to a hospital between 11/01/24 and 06/01/25. This resulted in 38 hospital transfers having occurred during that time frame. Findings: On 06/03/25 a review of Res #42's EMR showed the resident had been transferred to a hospital on five separate occasions: 10/24/24, 12/04/24, 03/24/25, 04/18/25, and 04/30/25. A further review of the EMR did not find documentation bed hold polices or written letters of transfer were given to the resident or their representative. On 06/03/25 at 10:50 a.m., RN #1 was asked what documentation was given to a resident when they were transferred to a hospital. They stated forms such as assessments, vital signs, code status, face sheets, and allergies. They were asked if the residents were given a written notice of transfer and copy of the bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-03 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Notice of Medicare Non-coverage form was provided to a resident in the required timeframe for 1 (#44) of 3 sampled resident reviewed for beneficiary notices. The BOM stated seven residents had discharged from Medicare part A services between 11/01/24 and 06/01/25. Findings: A CMS-10123 form [Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage], signed by Res. #44 on 03/03/25, showed the resident's Medicare Part A services would have ended on 03/04/25. On 06/02/25 at 3:16 p.m., the BOM was asked to explain the purpose of the CMS-10123 form. They stated it was a notice to inform a resident that skilled services funded by Medicare Part A would be ending on a particular date. The BOM was asked when the notice was required to be given to a resident. They stated it was to be given no later than 48 hours prior to the end date of the services. The BOM was asked to review Res #44's CMS-10123 signed on 03/03/25 for any deficiencies. They stated it appeared the resident received the form 24 hours prior to the end of skilled services which was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-03 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident receiving an antipsychotic medication had an appropriate diagnosis for 1 (#6) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The ADON reported 4 residents received antipsychotic medications. Findings: A facility policy titled Psychotropic Medication Policy and Procedure, dated 10/24/22, read in part, Psychotropic drugs will not be administered unless necessary to treat a specific condition diagnosed and documented in the clinical record. An admission record, dated 09/21/23, showed Res #6 had diagnoses which included dementia and depression. A quarterly assessment, dated 03/21/25, showed Res #6 had a BIMS score (a test for cognitive function) of 00, which was indicative of severe impairment for daily decision making. The assessment also showed Res #6 was receiving an antipsychotic medication. A physician's order, dated 04/01/25, showed Res #6 was receiving Seroquel (an antipsychotic medication) 25 mg by mouth at bedtime for dementia with other behavioral disturbance. On 06/03/25 at 1:35 p.m.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-02 · 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 ensure OHCA was contacted when a resident had a serious mental illness for one (#2) of one resident reviewed for PASRR assessments. The DON identified 49 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A PASRR policy, undated, read in part, .To ensure compliance with federal regulations and the accurate determination of eligibility for admission to Spiro Nursing Home, all applicants, regardless of pay source, must undergo the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) process . Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #2 was diagnosed with bipolar on 03/09/22, TBI on 06/21/22, and dementia on 10/10/22. ON 02/01/24 at 11:04 a.m., the DON stated there was no documentation to show the state agency had be notified of the new diagnosis of bipolar. On 02/01/24 at 1:04 p.m., the DON stated the policy for determination of a level II PASRR being done was any patient who had a prior history of mental diagnosis, a level II PASRR was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-02 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were secured for one of one insulin cart observed. The Administrator identified one insulin cart. Findings: A Medication Cart Storage, policy, undated, read in part, .No insulin or injectables shall remain in the treatment cart unless they are being administered and they will remain with the nurse who is administering the drugs . On 02/01/24 at 10:30 a.m., LPN #1 was observed to walk into a resident's room. They left the insulin cart outside of the room with the drawers facing the hall. The LPN's back was to the door and the cart was not visible to the LPN. When the LPN exited the room, they stated they were supposed to lock the cart. They said a resident could have opened it while they were in the room and could have been injured.
- Potential for harm · E2022-12-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person centered care plan for two (#2 and #42) of five residents sampled for care plans. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents, dated 12/05/22, documented a census of 55 residents. Findings: A Policy and Procedure for Care Planning, dated 10/14/15, read in part .develop a comprehensive narrative care plan for each resident which will describe the individualized care to be provided to attain or maintain the resident's highest possible physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Res #2 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included dementia and diabetes. A care plan, dated 12/01/22, did not contain documentation for dementia or diabetes. On 12/06/22 at 4:20 p.m., the DON reported neither dementia nor diabetes were documented on the care plan. On 12/06/22 at 4:24 p.m., the administrator reported the care plan should have included dementia and diabetes. Res #42 was admitted with diagnoses which included hypertensive heart disease. A physician's order dated, 06/16/20, read in…
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 · D2022-12-08 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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 a resident's family of a change in condition for one (#5) of one resident reviewed for notification of changes. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents, dated 12/05/22, documented a census of 55 residents. Findings: A nursing note, dated 08/09/22, at 7:30 a.m., read in part, Resident spilt hot coffee on (R) side of abdomen and (R) breast and skin is reddened at this time. A skin/wound note, dated 08/15/22, at 2:29 p.m., read in part, CNA notified this LPN of a red area to right hip. Upon inspection it appeared to be a burn. Res #5 states she spilled her coffee two days ago her roommate states she spilled coffee yesterday. DON aware SSD order in place. Dr. aware. A physician's order, dated 08/15/22, read in part, SSD Cream 1% (a topical antibiotic cream for burns) - apply to right hip/side topically every shift for altered skin integrity. On 12/06/22 at 11:26 a.m., Family member #1 reported they were not notified Res #5 had burns due to hot coffee in August of 2022. On 12/08/22 at 9:28 a.m., the DON stated…
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 · D2022-12-08 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to revise a care plan related to burns from coffee for one (#5) of one resident reviewed for accidents. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents dated, 12/05/22 documented a census of 55 residents. Findings: A nursing note, dated 08/09/22, at 7:30 a.m., read in part, Resident spilt hot coffee on (R) side of abdomen and (R) breast and skin is reddened at this time. A skin/wound note, dated 08/15/22, at 2:29 p.m., read in part, CNA notified this LPN of a red area to right hip. Upon inspection it appeared to be a burn. Res #5 states she spilled her coffee two days ago her roommate states she spilled coffee yesterday. DON aware SSD order in place. Dr. aware. A physician's order, dated 08/15/22, read in part, SSD Cream 1% (a topical antibiotic cream for burns) - apply to right hip/side topically every shift for altered skin integrity. A skin care plan last revised on 10/11/21 was not revised regarding burns received from coffee and Res #5's skin care treatment for burns. On 12/07/22 at 2:00 p.m., the MDS Coordinator…
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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MCCLURE, GARON | Individual | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2016 |
| MCCLURE, RHONDA | Individual | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2016 |
| KERRY MCCLURE LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 06/11/2008 |
| WILSON, HAPPY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 08/24/2011 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 4 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 83% 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.
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
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 375258. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-03, 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.