Wagoner Health & Rehab
205 North Lincoln Avenue, Wagoner, OK 74467 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 117 certified beds · (918) 485-2203 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection 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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 fell from 3 to 1 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 | 11.9% | 13.6% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.9% | 3.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 7.7% | 1.9% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 2.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.6% | 3.4% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.0% | 4.7% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 14.3% | 13.7% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.5% | 25.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 64.9% | 94.6% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.7% | 4.7% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 3.3% | 17.1% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 12.5% | 17.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.8% | 1.4% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.86 | 2.31 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.87 | 2.96 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.
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 | 12.6%CMS range 8.3–17.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.22 | 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 117 beds and averages 47.1 residents a day — about 40% occupied, or roughly 70 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 4.11 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.32 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.03 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 4.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.15 on weekdays — 3% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.31 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
37 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-25 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide meals at a palatable temperature for 3 (#4, 6, and #7) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for meal palatability.The infection preventionist identified 48 residents received meals from the kitchen. Findings:On 02/23/26 at 12:50 p.m., a test tray was sampled for temperature and palatability. The fried potatoes were undercooked and lukewarm, the turnip greens were lukewarm, the cornbread was cold and dry.1. An annual assessment for Res #4, dated 11/21/25, showed the resident had a BIMS score of 15 which indicated intact cognition.On 02/23/26 at 8:30 a.m., Res #4 stated when they ate in their room the food was always cold. Res #4 stated the food did not taste good.2. A quarterly assessment for Res #6, dated 01/10/26, showed the resident had a BIMS score of 15 which indicated intact cognition.On 02/23/26 at 8:55 a.m., Res #6 stated the food was cold by the time it was delivered to their room. Res #6 stated the food had tasted bad for a long time.On 02/24/26 at 7:50 a.m., Res #6 stated the potatoes they had for lunch the day…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
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 2 (dietary aide #1 and the DM) of 2 dietary staff washed their hands immediately upon entry to the kitchen.The infection preventionist identified 48 residents received meals from the kitchen. Findings:On 02/23/26 at 11:55 a.m., dietary aide #1 was observed to enter the kitchen and begin working without washing their hands.On 02/23/26 at 11:59 a.m., dietary aide #1 was observed to enter the kitchen and begin working without washing their hands.On 02/23/26 at 12:00 p.m., the DM was observed to enter the kitchen and begin working without washing their hands.On 02/23/26 at 12:04 p.m., dietary aide #1 was observed to enter the kitchen and begin working without washing their hands.On 02/23/26 at 12:07 p.m., dietary aide #1 was observed to enter the kitchen and begin working without washing their hands.An undated policy titled Preventing Foodborne Illness - Employee Hygiene and Sanitary Practices showed staff were required to wash their hands when entering the kitchen.On 02/24/26 at 8:00 a.m., the DM 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 · Dcited before2026-02-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the wasting of narcotic medications was witnessed by 2 staff members for 1 (#5) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for medication administration.The infection preventionist identified 48 residents received medication in the facility. Findings: An undated Discarding and Destroying Medications policy showed documenting the destruction of narcotics required the signatures of at least two witnesses.An admission record for Res #5, dated 08/20/24, showed the resident had diagnoses which included emphysema and heart failure.A physician's order for Res #5, dated 12/06/25, showed the resident was to receive oxycodone 10 mg (a narcotic pain medication) by mouth every six hours.A Controlled Drug Receipt/Record/Disposition Form, dated 02/2026, showed on 02/13/26 at 6:00 a.m. one 10 mg oxycodone tablet was wasted. The form only included one signature.On 02/24/26 at 11:15 a.m., LPN #1 stated if they needed to waste a narcotic medication a nurse had to witness and sign off with the other employee.On 02/24/26 at 3:25 p.m., the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure EBP was utilized during PEG tube care for 1 (#7) of 7 sampled residents reviewed for infection control.The infection preventionist identified 23 residents were on EBP. Findings:On 02/23/26 at 9:20 a.m., LPN #1 was observed during PEG tube care for Res #7. LPN #1 was not observed to wear a gown. A sign was observed on the resident's door that showed Res #7 was on EBP.A facility Enhanced Barrier Precautions policy, dated 04/29/24, read in part, EBP requires donning of gown and gloves during high-contact resident/guest care activities.EBP is indicated for resident/guests with any of the following when contact precautions do not apply.Wounds or an indwelling medical device.Indwelling medical devices examples include central lines, urinary catheters, feeding tubes and tracheostomies.A care plan focus for Res #7, initiated 05/09/25, showed the resident was at risk of infection due to the presence of a PEG tube and EBP was to be utilized when providing care.On 02/23/26 at 9:25 a.m., LPN #1 stated they should…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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 the care plan after a fall for 3 (#1, 2, and #3) of 4 sampled residents reviewed for fall interventions.The DON identified 19 falls in the last six months.Findings:A policy titled Falls - Clinical Protocol, revised April 2025, read in part, For an individual who has fallen, the staff and practitioner will begin to try to identify possible causes within 24 hours of the fall.the staff and physician will identify pertinent interventions to try to prevent subsequent falls and to address the risks of clinically significant consequences of falling.If the individual continues to fall, the staff and physician will re-evaluate the situation and reconsider possible reasons for the resident's falling and also reconsider the current interventions.1. An undated medical diagnosis list showed Res #1 had diagnoses which included congestive heart failure and multifocal motor neuropathy.A care plan, dated 01/01/25, showed Res #1 had potential for injury related to falls. The care plan showed Res #1 had fallen on 01/01/25, 03/31/25,…
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 · Fcited before2025-04-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure scoops were not left in bulk containers and the handwashing sink had hot water. The corporate nurse manager reported 46 residents received meals from the kitchen. Findings: On 04/07/25 at 7:27 a.m., an initial tour of the kitchen was conducted. A scoop was observed in a bulk container of flour and the handwashing sink did not have hot water. An undated facility policy titled Food Receiving and Storage, read in part, Foods shall be received and stored in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. On 04/09/25 at 10:15 a.m., the dietary manager stated that scoops should not be left in bulk containers, and that the handwashing sink should be repaired.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-10 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 competencies were completed yearly and upon hire for 5 (LPN #1, LPN #2, CNA #1, CNA #2, and CNA #3) of 5 employees reviewed for competencies. Human Resources reported seven LPNs and 21 CNAs were employed by the facility. Findings: 1. LPN #1 had a hire date of 02/27/25. On 04/09/25 at 4:30 p.m., LPN #1's employment file was reviewed, it did not show a competency/skills check had been completed upon hire. 2. LPN #2 had a hire date of 09/18/19. On 04/09/25 at 4:35 p.m., LPN #2's employment was reviewed, it did not show a competency/skills check had been completed upon hire. 3. CNA #1 had a hire date of 11/11/24. On 04/09/25 at 4:40 p.m., CNA #1's employment file was reviewed, it did not show a competency/skills check had been completed upon hire. 4. CNA #2 had a hire date of 02/04/25. On 04/09/25 at 4:45 P.m., CNA #2's employment filewas reviewed, it did not show a competency/skills check had been completed upon hire. 5. CNA #3 had a hire date of 08/25/24. On 04/09/25 at 4:50 p.m., CNA #3's employment filewas reviewed,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-10 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 psychotropic medications were monitored for side effects for 5 (#7, 17, 20, 32, and #41) of 5 sampled residents who were reviewed for unnecessary medications. The DON identified 19 residents received psychotropic medications. Findings: 1. A physician order, dated 10/28/24, showed an order for fluoxetine (an antidepressant medication) 20 mg every day for mood disorder with depressive features. A physician order, dated 12/10/24, showed an order for lorazepam (an antianxiety medication) 2 mg/ml give 0.25 ml at bedtime for anxiety. A quarterly assessment, dated 02/24/25, showed Resident #7 a diagnosis of anxiety, recurrent depressive disorder, mood disorder with depressive features, and schizoaffective disorder, had a BIMS summary score of two, which indicated the resident was severely impaired in cognition for daily decision making, had received an antipsychotic medication, antianxiety medication, and an antidepressant medication. A care plan, revised 02/27/25, read in parts, I use psychotropic medications .Monitor 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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-10 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure menus were reviewed and approved by the dietician. The corporate nurse manager reported 46 residents received food from the kitchen. Findings: An undated policy titled Menus, read in part, Menus are developed and prepared to meet resident choices including religious, cultural and ethnic needs while following established national guidelines for nutritional adequacy.The dietician reviews and approves all menus. A dietary menu, dated 04/02/25- 04/09/25, was reviewed. There was no documentation the menu had been approved by the dietician. On 04/09/25 at 10:15 a.m., the dietary manager stated they thought the menus were approved by the dietician and they would look for documentation. No documentation was provided. On 04/10/25 at 10:26 a.m., the social services director stated the menu had not been approved by the dietician.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
3. On 04/08/25 at 09:45 a.m., LPN #1 was observed flushing Resident #17's catheter. She was observed to don gloves and position the resident, then they doffed the gloves and did not perform hand hygiene. LPN #1 then proceeded to the hallway to obtain supplies, upon returning to the room, LPN #1 donned a pair of gloves without performing hand hygiene. LPN #1 then flushed the resident's catheter, went to the bathroom to retrieve paper towels and returned to the resident. LPN #1 then doffed the gloves and exited the room without performing hand hygiene. LPN #1 was not wearing a gown while flushing Resident #17's catheter. On 04/08/25 at 11:07 a.m., CNA #3 and CNA #4 were observed providing catheter care to Resident #17. They were not wearing gowns. A physician order, dated 11/13/24, showed an order to provide catheter care every shift. A quarterly assessment, dated 01/07/25, showed Resident #17 had a BIMS score (a test for cognitive function) of 15. Which was indicative of independence for daily decision making. The assessment also showed Resident #17 had an indwelling urinary…
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.
Show the remaining 27 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-10 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure admission assessments were accurate for 1 (#2) of 12 sampled residents whose assessments were reviewed. The administrator identified 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An admission assessment, dated 03/07/25, showed Resident #2, had a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, had received an anticoagulant medication while a resident, during the look back period, and had a BIMS score of 15. The medication administration record and treatment administration record, dated March 2025, did not show the resident had received an anticoagulant medication. On 04/09/25 at 1:52 p.m., the MDS coordinator stated they had coded the assessment inaccurately and should not have coded the resident had received an anticoagulant.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were developed for 2 (#21 and #41) of 12 sampled residents whose care plans were reviewed. The administrator identified 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. On 04/07/25 at 9:03 a.m., Resident #21 was observed in bed with a half bed rail, on the left side of the bed, in the up position. On 04/09/25 at 10:55 a.m., Resident #21 was observed in bed with a half bed rail, on the left side of the bed, in the up position. A policy titled Proper Use of Side Rails, dated December 2024, read in part, The use of side rails as an assistive devise will be addressed in the resident care plan. A quarterly assessment, dated 03/13/25, showed Resident #21 had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, a BIMS summary score of three, which indicated the resident was severely impaired in cognition for daily decision making. A care plan, revised 03/18/25, did not show Resident #21 utilized a half side rail on the left side for bed mobility. On 04/09/25 at 1:56 p.m., the MDS coordinator 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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
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 assessments were completed and consents were obtained for the use of bed rails for 1 (#21) of 1 sampled resident who was reviewed for bed rails. The nurse manager identified two residents who utilized bed rails. Findings: On 04/07/25 at 9:03 a.m., Resident #21 was observed in bed with a half bed rail, on the left side, in the up position. On 04/09/25 at 10:55 a.m., Resident #21 was observed in bed with a half bed rail, on the left side, in the up position. The Evaluation for Use of Side Rails form, dated 10/04/23, did not show the resident was assessed for entrapment with the use of the bed rail or alternatives to the use of the bed rail before they were implemented. The annual assessment, dated 12/11/24, documented Resident #21 had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, and the BIMS score was six, which indicated the resident was severely impaired in cognition for daily decision making. A policy titled, Proper Use of Side Rails, dated December 2024, read in part, When used for mobility or transfer, an…
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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure treatment carts were secured for 3 (North hall treatment cart, [NAME] hall treatment cart, and the overflow treatment cart) of 5 medication/treatment carts observed. The DON identified five medication/treatment carts in the facility. Findings: On 04/07/25 at 7:32 a.m., the North hall treatment cart and the overflow treatment cart was observed by the nurses station to be unlocked and unattended. On 04/07/25 at 7:34 a.m., the treatment carts were observed to be locked in the front living room area, by the nurses station. On 04/08/25 at 9:25 a.m., the [NAME] hall treatment cart and the overflow treatment cart was observed to be by the nurses station, unlocked, and unattended. On 04/08/25 at 12:38 p.m., the overflow treatment cart was observed to be unlocked and unattended by the nurses station. On 04/09/25 at 10:53 a.m., the North hall treatment cart was observed to be unlocked and unattended. On 04/09/25 at 10:54 a.m., LPN #2 was observed to exit a resident's room, lock the cart, and push it down the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-10 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide palatable meals for 4 (#2, #17, #20, and #46) of 18 residents interviewed regarding food palatability. The corporate nurse manager reported 46 residents received food from the kitchen. Findings: On 04/07/25 at 1:02 p.m., a test tray was sampled for palatability. The Dorito casserole was lukewarm and not well seasoned. The mixed vegetables were soggy, bland, and lukewarm. On 04/08/25 at 12:33 p.m., a test tray was sampled for palatability. The Spanish rice was warm and bland, and the banana cake was dry and without icing. 1. An admission assessment, dated 03/07/25, showed Resident #2 had a BIMS score (a test for cognitive functioning) of 15 which was indicative of independence for daily decision making. On 04/07/25 at 10:03 a.m., Resident #2 stated when they eat meals in their room the hot foods are not hot, and the cold foods are not cold. 2. A quarterly assessment, dated 01/07/25, showed Resident #17 had a BIMS score (a test for cognitive functioning) of 15 which was indicative of independence for daily decision…
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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — isolatedRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
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 beds/bed rails were monitored for safety for 1 (#21) of 1 sampled resident who was reviewed for bed rails. The nurse manager identified two residents who utilized bed rails. Findings: On 04/07/25 at 9:03 a.m., Resident #21 was observed in bed with a half bed rail in the up position on the left side. The bed rail was observed to be loose when moved side to side and back and forth. On 04/09/25 at 10:55 a.m., Resident #21 was observed in bed with a half bed rail in the up position on the left side. The bed rail was observed to be loose when moved side to side and back and forth. A policy titled, Bed Safety, dated June 2024, read in part, Inspection by maintenance staff of all beds and related equipment as part of regular bed safety program to identify risks and problems including potential entrapment risks. The annual assessment, dated 12/11/24, documented Resident #21 had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, and had a BIMS score was six, which indicated the resident was severely impaired in cognition 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-08 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the call light system was functioning in one of six occupied rooms resident rooms reviewed for call light functionality. The administrator reported the census was 53. Findings: A facility policy, reviewed 07/24, titled Maintenance Service read in part, .Functions of maintenance personnel include, but are not limited to .Maintaining the paging and nurse call system in good working order . On 10/08/24 at 10:05 am, LPN #1 stated when the call light was activated a light should illuminate in the hallway by the resident's door. At 10:10 am, CNA #1 stated when they observed that the light in front of a resident's door was illuminated that indicated the resident needed assistance. At 11:50 am, the call system in room [ROOM NUMBER] was activated, no light was illuminated in the hallway or at the nurse's desk. LPN #2 stated the call light for room [ROOM NUMBER] was not functioning. At 1:30 am, the maintenance supervisor stated they tested the call lights…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-12-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained to promote food safety and sanitation. The administrator identified 55 residents residing in the facility. Findings: On 12/21/23 at 9:10 a.m., a tour of the kitchen and dining area were conducted. The following observation was made: There were no dates on four partially used gallons of milk in refrigerator #1. On 12/21/23 at 9:20 a.m., the dietary manager stated the four gallons of milk should have open dates on them. The dietary manager removed the milk from the refrigerator.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-29 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 section the care plan decision column of the care area assessment section [section V] was completed on an annual assessment for one (#3) of two sampled resident reviewed for care plans. A facility Census List, dated 12/21/23, documented there were 55 residents living at the facility. Findings: A Comprehensive Assessment and the Care Area Process policy, dated 2001 and revised 2023, read in part, .Comprehensive assessment will be conducted to assist in the developing person-centered care plans . Resident #3 had diagnoses which included schizophrenia and recurrent depressive disorder. An annual assessment, dated 08/17/23, documented in the behaviors section [section E] the resident had rejected care one to three times during the look back period. The care planning decision column of section V [the section of the assessment were an interdisciplinary team (IDT) from the facility meet and decide wether to care plan any triggered care areas] was blank. On 12/27/23 at 1052 a.m. the MDS Coordinator stated they had found no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-29 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 create a comprehensive care plan for one (#3) of two sampled resident reviewed for care plans. A facility Census List, dated 12/21/23, documented there were 55 residents living at the facility. Findings: A Care Plan, Comprehensive Person Centered policy, dated 2001 and revised 2023, read in part, .The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT), in conjunction with the resident and his/her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person centered care plan for each resident . Resident #3 had diagnoses which included schizophrenia and recurrent depressive disorder. On 12/21/23 at 11:31 a.m., Resident #3 stated they had not attended a care plan meeting at the facility. On 12/27/23 at 1052 a.m. the MDS Coordinator stated they had found no documentation Resident #3 had attended a care plan meeting. On 12/28/23 at 9:43 a.m., the MDS Coordinator stated the care areas psychotropic medications, psychosocial, and behaviors had triggered on the last annual assessment, dated 08/17/23, but they had missed care planning…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-29 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure a prescribed medication was available for administration to a resident for one (#109) of seven sampled resident observed for medication administration. Findings: A Pharmacy Services Overview policy, dated 2001 and revised 2023, read in part, Residents have sufficient supply of their prescribed medications (routine, emergency, or as needed) in a timely manner .Nursing staff communicate prescriber orders to the pharmacy and are responsible for contacting the pharmacy if a resident's medication is not available for administration . Resident #109 had diagnoses which included heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation. A medication administration record, dated 12/01/23 through 12/31/23, documented the resident had missed two doses of Eliquis 5 mg two tabs twice daily on 12/21/23 and one dose on 12/22/23. On 12/22/23 at 8:00 a.m., CMA #1 was observed preparing medication for resident #109. They stated the resident's Eliquis [a blood thinner] was not in the building. They stated it had not arrived since it…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-29 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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 a response was received from the physician for a gradual dose reduction recommendation for one (#7) of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The DON reported the census was 55. Findings: An undated facility policy titled Antipsychotic Medication Use, read in part, .Antipsychotic medications will be prescribed at the lowest possible dosage for the shortest period of time and are subject to gradual dose reduction and re-review . Resident #7 had diagnoses which included depression and hypokalemia. A quarterly assessment, dated 11/16/23, documented the resident was cognitively intact and was receiving antianxiety and antidepressant medications. A MRR, dated 10/25/23, documented Resident #7 was receiving Vistaril 50 mg by mouth four times a day and Buspirone 10mg by mouth twice a day. The pharmacist asked the physician to consider a gradual dose reduction on these medications. Review of the clinical record did not document the physician had addressed the MRR. On 12/29/23 at 10:35 a.m., the DON…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-29 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 gradual dose reductions were attempted for psychotropic medications without an appropriate rationale to continue the current regimen for one (#38) of five sampled resident reviewed for unnecessary medications. A facility Census List, dated 12/21/23, documented there were 55 residents living at the facility. Findings: Resident #38 had diagnoses which included bipolar disorder and depression. A pharmacy note to Resident #38's prescriber documented the resident was prescribed Abilify, Lexapro, Lamictal, and Depakote for bipolar disorder. The pharmacy form further documented a request for the physician to attempt a gradual dose reduction for those medication if appropriate. Physician #1 checked the box for disagree and hand wrote, needs ask staff. On 12/28/23 at 11:46 a.m., physician #1 stated what they wrote said, needs, ask staff and that means they asked the nurses if the resident needed to stay on the four medications as they were. They stated the staff confirmed they need to stay on the medication and they…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-29 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure laboratory tests were obtained per physician's orders for one (# 2) of five residents reviewed for laboratory services. The administrator reported the census was 55. Findings: An undated policy titled Lab and Diagnostic Test Results - Clinical Protocol, read in part, .The physician will identify and order diagnostic and lab testing based on the resident's diagnostic and monitoring needs . If resident refuses, documentation from lab will be obtained and documented in the medical record . Resident #2 had diagnoses which included a fractured tibia and hypokalemia. A quarterly assessment, dated 09/16/23, documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment and was total dependent on staff for transfers. A physician order, dated 09/28/23, documented a valproic acid level was to be drawn on 10/02/23 and then every month on the first Monday. A review of Resident #1's clinical record did document any VPA levels were drawn for October, November, or December. A review of Resident #1's clinical record did not document the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-29 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — isolatedHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain records of the quality assurance and performance improvement (QAPI) program. Findings: The facility's QAPI Plan, dated 2019, read in part, .The Administrator, Director of Nursing, and Medical Director are responsible and accountable for developing, leading, and closely monitoring the QAPI program . On 12/29/23 at 9:50 a.m., the Administrator stated QAPI issues were discussed in every morning meeting. They stated the QAPI team meets quarterly. They were asked for documentation the meeting had occurred. At 9:58 a.m., the Administrator stated they could not locate the meeting documentation and that the staff were looking for them. At 10:10 a.m., the staff searched the MDS office. The Administrator stated they could not find the QAPI folder. At 10:30 a.m., the Administrator presented documentation for one meeting that occurred on 11/01/23. They stated the rest of the QAPI documentation was not found.
- Potential for harm · E2023-01-17 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure assessments were submitted in a timely manner for four (#21, 27, 31, and #45) of four residents who were reviewed for assessments. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form identified 45 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: The CMS Submission Report, dated 07/19/22, documented the quarterly assessment for Resident #27 had a target date of 05/27/22. The report read in parts, .Record Submitted Late: The submission date is more than 14 days after Z0500B [the MDS completion date] on this new .assessment . The CMS Submission Report, dated 09/03/22, documented the quarterly assessment for Resident #21 had a target date of 08/08/22. The report read in parts, .Record Submitted Late: The submission date is more than 14 days after Z0500B [the MDS completion date] on this new .assessment . The CMS Submission Report, dated 12/20/22, documented the admission assessment for Resident #45 had a target date of 08/29/22. The report read in parts, .Assessment Completed Late: Z0500B [the MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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 ensure the care plans were reviewed and revised for four (#5, 7, 12, and #17) of four care plans reviewed. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form documented 45 residents resided in the facility. Findings: The Care Plans, Comprehensive Person - Centered policy, dated July 2022, read in parts, .The Interdisciplinary Team must review and update the care plan: When there has been a significant change in the resident's condition .At least quarterly, in conjunction with the required quarterly MDS assessment . 1. Resident #5 admitted with diagnoses which included depression and edema. A Care Plan, revised 01/22/21, documented Resident #5 was ordered to take an antidepressant of Remeron, a diuretic of HCTZ, and a supplement of Klor-Con. Physician's Orders, dated January 2023, did not document orders for the antidepressant, diuretic, and supplement. On 01/23/23 at 3:32 p.m., the ADON was asked who was responsible for reviewing and revising care plans. They stated the MDS coordinator was responsible for the care plans…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-01-17 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the services of an RN were utilized eight hours a day from 01/12/23 through 01/22/23. The Resident Census and Condition of Residents form identified 45 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: The Staffing policy, dated 11/2022, read in part, .RN must be on duty 8 hours a day 7 days a week . On 01/13/23 at 4:45 p.m., the administrator was asked if a RN/DON was on staff. They stated no the DON had quit after working an eight hour shift that day. The administrator was asked if a plan was in place for RN coverage. They stated they were working on it and had calls out to several and had not heard back as of yet. On 01/19/23 at 9:22 a.m., the administrator was asked if an RN had worked during the time of the survey. They stated no and added an RN may be filling in over the weekend. The administrator was asked to provide a punch detail for registered nurses for during the dates of survey. They stated they did not have an RN beginning the day after state entered to present. On 01/19/23 at 9:36 a.m., the ADON/LPN 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 · Ecited before2023-01-17 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 gradual dose reductions were addressed for one (#8) and medications were monitored by physician ordered labs for one (#34) of five sampled residents who were reviewed for unnecessary medications. Corporate nurse #1 identified 46 residents who received medications. Findings: The Lab and Diagnostic Test Results - Clinical Protocol policy, dated July 2022, read in parts, .The physician will identify and order diagnostic and lab testing based on the resident's diagnostic and monitoring needs .The staff will process test requisitions and arrange for tests . 1. Resident #8 had diagnoses which included schizophrenia and dementia. A Single Page for Reviewed Residents form, from the consultant pharmacist, dated 12/23/22, read in part, .[Resident #8] has an order for Risperidone (an antipsychotic medication) 0.5 mg by mouth once a day. Please consider a gradual dose reduction with this therapy, if appropriate . The recommendation had not been addressed by the physician. Physician Orders, dated January 2023, documented…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
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 scoops were not stored in food bins for five of five bins observed and ensure refrigerator shelves were free of spilled liquids for one of one refrigerators observed. Corporate nurse #1 identified 46 residents who received nourishment from the kitchen. Findings: The Sanitization policy, dated October 2022, read in parts, .The food service area shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary manner . On 01/11/23 at 5:09 p.m., the refrigerator in the kitchen was observed to have a metal pan with a log of ground beef in it. The log of ground beef was observed to hang out of the pan and a dark red/brown liquid was observed under the end of the ground beef, on the bottom of the refrigerator. The other side of the refrigerator was observed to have cartons of eggs. Yellow and clear liquid was observed under and in front of the cartons on the bottom of the refrigerator. On 01/11/23 at 5:19 p.m., bins with blueberry muffin mix, brown sugar, flour, granulated sugar, and corn meal were observed to contain scoops…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-17 · 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 the resident and/or the resident representative of clinical changes to the resident for one (#17) of three sampled residents. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, documented 45 residents resided in the facility. Findings: The Change in a Resident's Condition or Status policy, dated May 2022, read in parts, .Our facility shall promptly notify the resident, his or her Attending Physician, and representative .of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition and/or status (e.g., changes in level of care, billing/payments, resident rights, etc.) . Resident #17 admitted with diagnoses which included Parkinson's disease. Review of the Face Sheet for Resident #17 revealed the resident was not self responsible. A Nurse Note, dated 01/06/23, documented Resident #17 had congestion and the doctor had ordered an antibiotic. The clinical record did not document the resident representative was notified of a change in condition. On 01/12/23 at 5:32 p.m., during an interview with the resident representative 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-17 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure assessments were accurate for one (#8) of three residents who were reviewed for limited range of motion/contractures. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form identified four residents who had contractures. Findings: Resident #8 had diagnoses which included generalized osteoarthritis and idiopathic gout, multiple sites. A quarterly assessment, dated 09/27/22, documented Resident #8 had no impairment in range of motion for their upper or lower extremities. A quarterly assessment, dated 12/27/22, documented Resident #8 had no impairment in range of motion for their upper or lower extremities and the resident was moderately impaired in cognition for daily decision making. On 01/12/23 at 9:07 a.m., Resident #8 was observed to open their left hand but the third and fourth digit was observed to remain bent downward. Resident #8 was asked how long they had experienced limited range of motion in the third and fourth digits. They stated for a little while. On 01/23/23 at 3:48 p.m., corporate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-17 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolatedProvide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
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 code status was updated and accurate for one (#18) of five residents sampled for code status accuracy. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form documented 45 residents resided in the facility. Findings: The Advance Directives policy, dated 2022, read in part, .Changes or revocations of a directive must be submitted in writing to the Administrator. The Administrator may require new documents if changes are extensive. The Care Plan Team will be informed of such changes and/or revocations so that appropriate changes can be made in the resident assessment (MDS) and care plan . On 01/12/23 at 11:18 a.m., the clinical record for Resident #18 was reviewed for code status. The clinical record had a DNR and a red sticker on the face sheet and spine of chart. A Physician's Order, dated November 2022, documented the code status for Resident #18 as a full code. On 01/19/23 at 11:29 a.m., LPN #1 was asked why Resident #18 had a physician's order for a full code when a DNR was in the clinical record. They 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 · D2023-01-17 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 treatment and services to prevent further decrease in range of motion was provided for one (#8) of three residents who were reviewed for limited range of motion. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form identified four residents who had contractures. Findings: Resident #8 had diagnoses which included generalized osteoarthritis and idiopathic gout, multiple sites. A Care Plan, revised 08/25/22, did not document any limitation in ROM for Resident #8. A quarterly assessment, dated 09/27/22, documented Resident #8 had no impairment in range of motion for their upper or lower extremities. A quarterly assessment, dated 12/27/22, documented Resident #8 had no impairment in range of motion for their upper or lower extremities and the resident was moderately impaired in cognition for daily decision making. On 01/12/23 at 9:07 a.m., Resident #8 was observed to open their left hand but the third and fourth digit was observed to remain bent downward. Resident #8 was asked how long they had experienced…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-17 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were monitored with labs ordered by the physician for one (#33) of five sampled residents who were reviewed for unnecessary medications. Corporate nurse #1 identified 46 residents who received medications in the facility. Findings: Resident #33 had diagnoses which included benign neoplasm of the brain. The care plan, dated 11/19/22, read in parts, .Obtain labs as ordered through the next review date .CBC, CMP q 3 months while on Methotrexate . Physician Orders, dated January 2023, documented Resident #33 had an order for Methotrexate (a cancer medication) 10mg by mouth weekly starting 12/06/21 and a CBC/CMP every three months while taking Methotrexate starting 01/12/22. Review of the clinical record revealed did not reveal the CMP had been completed every three months. The clinical record documented a CMP dated 02/08/22 and 08/09/22 were obtained. On 01/23/23 at 3:16 p.m., the ADON was asked how labs were monitored to ensure they were completed as ordered by the physician. They stated the labs would…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-17 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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 a medication administration error rate was less than five percent. There were two errors out of 25 opportunities observed during a medication pass which made the medication error rate 8%. Corporate nurse #1 identified 46 residents who received medications. Findings: The Administering Medications policy, dated December 2022, read in parts, .Medications shall be administered .as prescribed .Medications must be administered in accordance with the orders . 1. Resident #12 had diagnoses which included GERD. On 01/17/23 at 4:01 p.m., Resident #12 was observed during medication pass. CMA #2 was observed to administer 30 mls of antacid by mouth and document on the back of the MAR. Physician Orders, dated January 2023, did not reveal an order for antacid. On 01/19/23 at 11:27 a.m., the ADON was asked if Resident #12 had an order for antacid. The ADON reviewed the monthly physician orders and telephone orders and stated no. The ADON was asked why the resident had received antacid. They stated the resident may…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-17 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure labs were completed as ordered by the physician for one (#8) of five sampled residents whose labs were reviewed. Corporate nurse #1 identified 41 residents who had physician orders for routine labs. Findings: The Lab and Diagnostic Test Results - Clinical Protocol policy, dated July 2022, read in parts, .The physician will identify and order diagnostic and lab testing based on the resident's diagnostic and monitoring needs .The staff will process test requisitions and arrange for tests . Resident #8 had diagnoses which included schizophrenia. Physician Orders, dated January 2023, documented the resident was to have a CBC every six months with a start date of 06/21/21. Review of the clinical record did not reveal a CBC had been completed. On 01/19/23 at 2:27 p.m., the ADON was asked for documentation of completed CBC lab results for Resident #8. On 01/23/23 at 3:16 p.m., the ADON was asked how labs were monitored to ensure they were completed as ordered by the physician. They stated the labs would automatically…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to BRADFORD MONTGOMERY — 11 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 2.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.2★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MONTGOMERY, BRADFORD | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/22/2014 |
| MORAVEK, RICHARD | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 10/01/2015 |
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 80% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $192K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OK
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 375369. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-10, 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.