No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Saint Simeons Episcopal Home

3701 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd, Tulsa, OK 74106 · Non profit - Church related · 109 certified beds · (918) 425-3583 Medicare only — no Medicaid

Call the home — (918) 425-3583 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Mar 2025$4,017 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • 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
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2025
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • the CMS record shows $4,017 in federal fines (most recent 2024-05-22)

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1705 E 19th St Ste 302 · (918) 748-7585 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3606 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd · (918) 425-1385 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1247 N Osage Dr · (918) 346-6342 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1622 N Main St · (918) 596-7275 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1839 N Boston Ave · (539) 204-4707

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased7.1%13.6%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.2%3.3%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.9%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%2.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms5.3%3.4%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.9%4.7%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened8.2%13.7%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication10.9%25.7%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.6%94.6%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.5%4.7%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.0%17.1%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.7%17.5%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.8%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine62.3%74.1%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.3%27.3%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit17.1%16.6%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.652.311.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.342.961.80worse

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.

56.4% 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 176 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

56.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
62.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.45U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.21hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 62.6% 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 107 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 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF56.4%CMS range 49.1–64.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.0%CMS range 8.1–15.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge62.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge60.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge50.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified86.6%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting93.8%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 discharge95.6%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.2%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.6%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.4%CMS range 4.9–12.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.101.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.51
RN hours/ resident / day
1.40
LPN hours/ resident / day
4.03
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.93
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.50
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 109 beds and averages 74.1 residents a day — about 68% occupied, or roughly 35 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 5.93 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.51 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 4.03 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 5.43 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.13 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.51 to 0.50 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-01-24)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2023-10-24)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-04 · tag F0557 — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
    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 treated with dignity and respect for 1 (#4) of 4 residents who were reviewed for dignity. The administrator identified 78 residents who resided at the facility. Findings: Resident #4 had diagnoses which included mood disorder, PTSD, and anxiety. The five day assessment, dated 01/20/25, showed Resident #4 had a BIMS score of 13 and was cognitively intact for decision making. Review of the care plan, dated 01/31/25, for Resident #4, showed a focus of being dependent on staff for ADLs in toileting hygiene and transfers. Review of the ODH Form 283, dated 02/26/25, showed Resident #4 had alleged allegations of abuse/mistreatment by CNA #1. The form showed on 02/26/25 CNA #2 had reported Resident #4 told them they feared CNA #1 and did not want them to return to their room at night. The form documented Resident #4 stated CNA #1 came to their room to change their wet brief, removed their brief and left them naked to soil the bed and never returned. The form showed CNA#1 had been suspended pending the…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-04 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from neglect for 1 (#4) of 4 residents who were sampled and reviewed for neglect. The administrator identified 78 residents who resided at the facility. Findings: Resident #4 had diagnoses which included mood disorder, PTSD, and anxiety. The five day assessment, dated 01/20/25, showed Resident #4 had a BIMS score of 13 and was cognitively intact for decision making The Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program policy, revised April 2021, read in part, Develop and implement policies and protocols to prevent and identify: a. abuse or mistreatment of residents; b. neglect of residents. An Identifying Neglect policy, revised September 2022, read in part, Preventing resident neglect is a priority throughout all levels of this organization.Neglect is defined as the failure of the facility, its employees or service providers to provide goods and services to a resident that are necessary to avoid physical pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress.Neglect occurs when 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure assistance with activities of daily living was provided for 1 (#4) of 4 residents who were reviewed for ADL assistance. The administrator identified 78 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: Resident #4 had diagnoses which included fracture of neck of left femur, fracture of left pubis and glaucoma. The five day assessment, dated 01/20/25, showed Resident #4 had a BIMS score of 13 and was cognitively intact for decision making. A care plan, revised 01/29/25, showed Resident #4 was dependent for toileting hygiene. On 02/27/25 at 2:34 p.m., Resident #4 stated an incident occurred when a CNA #1 had left them naked in bed. They stated they were pleased CNA #1 had been suspended and that it was unlikely CNA #1 would return. Resident #4 stated CNA #1 was not mean or hurt them, they felt CNA #1 did not like their job. They stated no other CNA had left them like that, just CNA #1. On 03/03/25 at 6:14 p.m., CNA #4 stated they had found Resident #4 at the start of their day shift on 02/26/25, sitting on the side of…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-01-24 · tag F0640 — isolated
    Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure discharge assessments were submitted to CMS within seven days of completion of the assessment for two (#64 and #66) of 18 sampled residents whose assessments were reviewed. The administrator reported 75 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Res #64 admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included hypertension, hyponatremia, and malnutrition. A discharge assessment, dated 08/29/24, was completed but not submitted to CMS. Res #66 admitted to the facility with diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cerebrovascular accident, and hypertension. A discharge assessment, dated 08/31/24, was completed but not submitted to CMS. On 01/24/25 at 11:03 a.m., the MDS coordinator reported the assessments should have been submitted

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-01-24 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure assessments were coded accurately for one (#75) of 18 sampled residents whose assessments were reviewed. The administrator reported 75 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Res #75 admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included heart failure, hypertension, and diabetes. A Discharge summary, dated [DATE], documented the resident went home. A discharge assessment, dated 10/28/24, documented the resident was discharged to the hospital. On 01/23/25 at 1:44 p.m., the MDS coordinator reported the assessment was not accurate.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-01-24 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain an order for suprapubic catheter care for one (#46) of one resident reviewed for catheter care. The administrator identified 75 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Resident #46 had diagnoses which included benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms. On 1/24/25 at 10:57 a.m., LPN #1 was preparing to perform suprapubic catheter care. When reviewing the resident's orders they noted there was not an order for catheter care. LPN #1 stated there should be an order for catheter care. On 1/24/25 at 11:29 a.m., the DON stated the resident went to the hospital and when they returned the order for catheter care was not put into the resident's orders.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-24 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — pattern
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    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 free from abuse for two (#3 and #4) of three residents sampled for abuse. On 10/05/24 Res #3 was left soiled in bed and stuck between the bed and the wall. On 10/14/24 LPN #4 did not provide hydration, medication, or dressing changes for Res #4. The facility was in past noncompliance after having put the final measures in place to correct the deficiency on 12/13/24. The administrator identified 75 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Res #3 had diagnoses which included Parkinson's and immobility. A state reportable incident form, dated 10/05/24, documented on 10/05/24 CNA #4 left Resident #3 soiled and wedged in the bed while covering for another aide who was on break. The form documented CNA #4 was removed from patient care immediately and suspended. The form documented the administrator contacted the family, resident's legal representative, Adult Protective Services, and the appropriate licensing board. The form documented all residents residing in the facility were questioned on…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-09 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to prevent abuse for one (#2) of three sampled residents who were sampled for abuse. Administrator #1 identified 71 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Resident #2 had diagnoses which included dementia and anxiety. An Incident Report Form, dated 10/12/23, documented the ADON overheard Resident #2 ask CNA #1 if the police were there yet because they were still scared. It was documented the ADON interviewed the resident and they stated they did not want to go back to their room because they were afraid of being hit again. It was documented Resident #2 stated CNA #2 took the buzzer so they could not call for help, turned of the lights and the TV, and would not help them all night. It was documented the resident stated they began to scream for the nurse when CNA #2 came back into the room and hit them. The facility's in-services records documented they had in-services with all staff on abuse dated 06/17/24. A review of the quality assurance records indicated abuse was being monitored with each quality assurance meeting…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-22 · tag F0622 — isolated
    Not transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was not involuntarily discharged for one (#1) of three sampled residents reviewed for involuntary discharge. The Administrator identified 77 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Transfer or Discharge, Facility-Initiated policy, revised 10/23, read in part, Once admitted to the facility, residents have the right to remain in the facility. Facility-initiated transfers and discharges, when necessary, must meet specific criteria and require residents/representative notification and orientation, and documentation as specified in this policy. 1. Each resident will be permitted to remain in the facility, and not be transferred or discharged unless: a .necessary for the resident's welfare . b . the resident no longer needs the services provided by this facility . c. the safety of individuals in the facility is endangered . d. the health of individuals in the facility would otherwise be endangered; e.nonpayment . f. the facility…

    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 · E2022-08-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to track infection and analyze the data for trends in infection for three, (June, July, and August of 2022), of three months of tracking and trending data. The administrator identified 83 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 08/17/22, the infection control tracking and trending reports were requested from the Infection Control Preventionist (ICP). The ICP was unable to provide these reports. On 08/18/22 the reports were again requested. The ICP stated she was working on them. On 08/18/22 at 1:05 p.m., the ICP stated, I was doing the tracking and trending, but then we got a lot of Covid19 and the tracking and trending just kind of fell off. Since mid June there has not been tracking and trending on the form. I was keeping up with the tracking and trending on a daily basis by looking at the individual lab sheets. We had not formally compiled the information. When asked if this was the proper way to do tracking and trending the ICP stated no. On 08/ 18/22 at 1:36 p.m. the administrator stated she was unaware 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-08-18 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure services related to dialysis were coordinated for one (#75) of one residents who were reviewed for dialysis services. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form documented one resident received dialysis. Findings: Resident #75 had diagnoses which included end stage renal disease. A physician order, dated 02/18/22, documented the resident was to be referred to dialysis for treatment. A quarterly assessment, dated 07/06/22, documented the resident received dialysis. A nurse's note, dated 07/27/22, documented the resident had returned from dialysis and had been seen by the nephrologist. The note documented the resident returned with a physician progress note to plan for surgery to place an upper fistula or graft. A physician progress note, dated 07/27/22, documented the resident had a failed left forearm fistula and to plan for surgery for an upper arm fistula or graft. The progress note was noted by LPN #1. Review of the clinical record did not reveal documentation a follow up had occurred for 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-08-18 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors for one (#69) of five residents whose medications were reviewed during an observation of the medication pass. The administrator identified 83 residents who received medications. Findings: The monthly physician's orders, dated August 2022, documented the resident was to receive one phenytoin sodium extended release 100mg three times daily for a diagnosis of epilepsy. On 08/18/22 at 9:10 a.m., CMA #1 was observed to administer two phenytoin sodium extended release 100mg capsules to resident #69 during the morning medication pass. The CMA placed two capsules in the souffle cup and handed the medication card to the surveyor. The medication card documented to give the resident two phenytoin sodium extended release 100mg capsules in the morning, one in the afternoon, and one in the evening. On 08/18/22 at 3:05 p.m., the CMA was asked how many phenytoin sodium extended release capsules they administered to resident #69. The CMA stated the medication card…

    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 · D2022-08-18 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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 record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to correctly label stored medications for one (#69) of five residents whose medications were reviewed during an observation of the medication pass. This resulted in a significant medication error for resident #69. The administrator identified 83 residents who received medications. Findings: The monthly physician's orders, dated August 2022, documented resident #69 was to receive phenytoin sodium extended release 100mg three times daily for a diagnosis of epilepsy. On 08/18/22 at 9:10 a.m., CMA #1 was observed to administer two phenytoin sodium extended release 100mg capsules to resident #69 during the morning medication pass. The CMA placed two capsules in the souffle cup and handed the medication card to the surveyor. The medication card documented to give the resident two phenytoin sodium extended release 100mg capsules in the morning, one in the afternoon, and one in the evening. There was no indicator to identify the medication dosage had been changed. On 08/18/22 at 3:05 p.m., the CMA was asked how many…

    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

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$4,017 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $4,017 — penalty dated 2024-05-22

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
CHAFFIN, KYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
GREEN, ANGELAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

$16.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+0.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 0%Medicare 15%Other / private 85%

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

$583per resident / day
operating cost
$17,712per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$584per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Oklahoma Medicaid page for homes that do.

Typical monthly cost in Oklahoma
$7,026/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,756/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,150/mo
Assisted living

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 375554. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-01-24, 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.

What to do next