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

Woodward Skilled Nursing And Therapy

429 E Downs Avenue, Woodward, OK 73801 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 80 certified beds · (580) 256-6448 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (580) 256-6448 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0604, F0609) — most recent Jul 20261 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$8,278 in federal fines
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

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)
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • the CMS record shows $8,278 in federal fines (most recent 2025-04-25)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (79%) runs well above the national median (45%)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

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 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1712 Downs Ave · (800) 511-8940 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walmart0.6 mi
3215 Williams Ave · (580) 256-0097 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2821 8th St · (580) 254-3404 · Call to confirm hours
Park
108 Temple Houston Dr · (580) 216-9058 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
400 Downs Ave · (580) 254-3316

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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 increased5.8%13.6%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.9%3.3%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.1%1.9%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.9%2.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.8%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 injury8.3%4.7%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened16.7%13.7%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication30.4%25.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.7%94.6%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.6%4.7%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.9%17.1%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table6.3%17.5%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication3.8%1.8%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine82.5%74.1%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission41.8%27.3%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit33.6%16.6%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.732.311.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.962.961.80worse

‡ 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.

52.7% 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 78 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
61.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.04U.S. median 0.30
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.01hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy

Met the expected recovery: 61.1% 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 36 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 0.04 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 2% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 167% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 14% — 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 SNF52.7%CMS range 41.7–59.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.7%CMS range 6.3–15.010.7%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 discharge61.1%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 discharge50.0%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 discharge58.3%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 identified95.2%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 setting100.0%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 dischargenot 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 stay0.0%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 worsened4.8%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 hospitalization7.1%CMS range 3.9–11.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.941.02Oct 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
1.10
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.46
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.07
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.30
RN hoursweekends
78.7%
Total nursing turnover
66.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 27.7 residents a day — about 35% occupied, or roughly 52 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 4.07 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 2.46 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.60 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.82 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.35 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 79% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

6 ↑
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-07-16)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-04)

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.

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

  • Actual harm · G2025-04-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a 2 person transfer was completed per the care plan for 1 (#1) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for accident hazards. The DON identified 43 residents resided in the facility and 17 residents required two staff members to transfer. Findings: On 04/22/25 at 3:08 p.m., Resident #1 was observed in their room, sitting in their recliner, with a mechanical lift sheet under them. Resident #1 did not answer questions appropriately or would answer, I don't know. On 04/23/25 at 12:52 p.m., CNA #4 and CNA #5 were observed to use a mechanical lift and transfer Resident #1 from their wheelchair to their recliner. Resident #1's Care Plan, dated 06/21/22, read in part, assist x 2 for transfers. Resident #1's Quarterly Assessment, dated 10/23/24, showed Resident #1's BIMS score was a 4, which indicated the resident's cognition was severely impaired. The assessment showed Resident #1 did not have an impairment in their upper extremities. An Incident Report, dated 12/07/24, showed while repositioning a resident, the staff…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2026-07-16 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
    Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
    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 sufficient staffing was available:a. to turn and reposition residents at risk for pressure ulcers for 1 (#3); andb. to prevent dependent residents from being taken to the dining room one hour before meals for 1 (#9) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for staffing. The DON identified 15 dependent residents resided in the facility.Findings: 1. On 07/14/26 from 8:49 a.m. to 11:39 a.m., during continuous observation, Resident #3 was observed lying on their right side in bed throughout the observation period. Staff was not observed to check on Resident #3 or reposition the resident during the continuous observation.An admission assessment for Resident #3, dated 06/16/26, showed the resident's cognition was severely impaired with a BIMS score of 0. The assessment showed the resident was at risk for developing pressure ulcers.A care plan for Resident #3, dated 06/12/26, showed the resident was to be turned every two hours, heels offloaded with pillows, and required assistance with turning and repositioning…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-07-16 · tag F0730 — pattern
    Observe each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure annual nurse aide skill reviews was conducted for 2 (CNA #2 and CNA #3) of 2 nurse aides sampled for employee training review. The administrator identified 35 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. CNA #2's employee file showed they had a hire date of 10/16/24. There was no documentation to show CNA #2 had an annual skills review completed in or after 10/2025. 2. CNA #3's employee file showed they had a hire date of 01/08/25. There was no documentation to show CNA #3 had an annual skills review in or after 01/2026. On 07/16/26 at 12:51 p.m., the administrator stated the required annual skills review for CNA #2 and CNA#3 were not conducted.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-07-16 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — pattern
    Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
    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 maintain an effective pest control program to ensure the facility remained free of pests.The administrator identified 35 residents resided in the facility. Findings:On 07/14/26 at 10:57 a.m., during an observation of the lunch meal service, three flies were observed on the dining table while residents drank coffee.On 07/14/26 at 11:34 a.m., during an observation of the lunch meal service, eight flies landed on top of the steam table while food was being prepared and served from the steam table.On 07/14/26 at 11:36 a.m., during an observation of the lunch meal, there was a blue light hung in the dining room on the wall.On 07/14/26 at 11:56 a.m., during an observation of the lunch meal service, flies were observed landing on residents' plates containing food.On 07/16/26 at 9:57 a.m., during a wound care observation, multiple flies were observed landing on the clean wound care supplies.A policy titled Pest Control, dated 10/2008, read in part, It's 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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-07-16 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    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 an allegation of physical abuse was reported to the State Agency within the two hour required timeframe for 1 (#3) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse.The administrator identified 35 residents resided in the facility Findings:On 07/14/26 at 1:18p.m., Resident #3 was observed sitting in a wheelchair with four round purple and yellow areas of circular bruising on their left upper arm.A policy titled Resident Abuse, Neglect and Misappropriation of Property, dated 07/2018, read in part, All allegations and incidents of abuse, neglect or misappropriation of residents' property, must be reported to Quality Assurance Performance Improvement committee, appropriate Federal and State Agencies including OSDH and investigated to establish a reasonable conclusion about the validity of the allegation .Immediately but not later than 2 hours if the alleged violation involves abuse or results in serious bodily injury.An admission assessment for Resident #3, dated 06/16/26, showed the resident had a BIMS score 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-07-16 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident received pressure ulcer prevention interventions to include repositioning every two hours for 1 (#3) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.The DON identified three residents with pressure ulcers. Findings:On 07/14/26 from 8:49 a.m. to 11:39 a.m. during continuous observation, Resident #3 was observed lying on their right side in bed throughout the observation period. Staff was not observed to check on resident.A policy titled Skin Integrity/ Wound Care, revised 07/2024, read in part, To promote healing of pressure ulcers.Use Proper positioning, transferring, and turning techniques.A Braden Scale for Resident #3, dated 06/10/26, showed:mobility (ability to change and control body position) as very limited, andfriction and shear (require moderate to maximum assistance in moving).A care plan for Resident #3, dated 06/12/26, showed an intervention to turn the resident every two hours, offload heels with pillows, and assist with turning and repositioning frequently. An admission…

    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 · D2026-07-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure urinary catheter bags were not placed on trash cans or allowed to touch the floor for 1 (#7) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for urinary catheters.The DON identified two residents with urinary catheters resided in the facility.Findings: On 07/15/26 at 8:52 a.m., Resident #7 was observed in their room sitting in their recliner. Resident #7's urinary catheter bag was observed hanging on a small trash can beside the recliner and touching the floor. On 07/16/26 at 9:53 a.m., Resident #7's urinary catheter bag was observed hanging on a small trash can beside their recliner and touching the floor. A policy titled Catheter Care Guideline, dated 03/01/25, read in part, Ensure care aligns with safe and effective management of urinary catheters and reduce the risk of infection and promote resident comfort and dignity. A physician's order for Resident #7, dated 07/02/26, showed catheter care every shift and as needed. A significant change assessment for Resident #7, dated 07/04/26, showed the resident's cognition…

    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 · D2024-10-04 · tag F0637 — isolated
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    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 complete a significant change assessment for one (#37) of 12 sampled residents reviewed for assessments. The Long Term Care Application, dated 10/01/24, documented 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A RAI manual, dated October 2023, read in part, .Significant change MDS completion date must be no later than 14 days from the ARD and no later than 14 days after the determination that the criteria for an SCSA were met . Resident #37 had diagnoses which included depression with psychotic features, anxiety, and diabetes mellitus. A significant change assessment, dated 09/15/24, was not completed by the ARD date. On 10/04/24 at 8:22 a.m., the MDS coordinator was asked what was the policy for completing a MDS in a timely manner. They stated there was no policy and they referred back to the RAI manual for instructions. They were tasked to review the significant change assessment dated [DATE]. They were asked if the significant change had been…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-04 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    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 resident assessments were accurately coded for one (#11) of 12 sampled residents reviewed for assessments. The Long-Term Care Facility Application, dated 10/01/24, documented 45 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Resident #11 had diagnoses which included coronary artery bypass, heart disease with heart failure, and congestive heart failure. A physician's order, dated 10/04/24, documented clopidogrel bisulfate (Plavix) (antiplatelet medication). A significant change assessment, dated 07/10/24, doucmented Plavix as a anticoagulant and not as a antiplatelet. On 10/04/24 at 11:40 a.m., the MDS coordinator was asked what was the facility policy on accuracy of assessments. They stated they followed physician orders. They were asked to review the significant change assessment dated [DATE]. They were asked if Resident #11 was on a anticoagulant or a antiplatelet medication and if the medication coding was correct on the significant change…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-04 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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 plan was revised and updated for one (#36) of 12 sampled residents reviewed for care plans. The Long-Term Care Facility Application, dated 10/01/24, documented 45 residents resided at the facility. Findings: Resident #36 had diagnoses which included insomnia, anxiety, acute kidney, urethritis, chronic urinary tract infection, and history of urinary retention. A care plan, dated 12/23/23, documented the resident would not have a decline in functional status. The care plan did not document any further updates for a decline in ADL status. A quarterly assessment, dated 07/26/24, documented staff assistant with ADLs was supervision to moderate assist. A significant change assessment, dated 08/23/24, doucmented the resident required maximum assist with ADLs. No revision or update to the ADL careplan was noted on current care plan. On 10/03/24 at 12:29 p.m., Corporate Nurse Consultant #1 was asked the facility policy for revising and updating care plans. They stated they would have to look at the RAI manual to be…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-08-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were given as ordered for one (#5) of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 08/08/23, documented 47 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Medication Administration-General Guidelines policy, effective January 2022, read in part, .For residents not in their rooms or otherwise unavailable to receive medication on the pass .After completing the medication pass, the nurse returns to the missed resident to administer the medication . Resident #5 was scheduled to receive the following medications during the 7 a.m.-11 a.m. time slot: Aspirin Low Dose 81 mg, Pantoprazole Sodium 40 mg, Polyethylene Glycol 3350 Powder 17 gm, Docusate Sodium 100 mg, Ipratropium Bromide Solution 0.06% 2 sprays in both nostrils, Metoprolol Tartrate 25 mg, Mucinex ER 600 mg, Propranolol HCL 10 mg , Seroquel 50 mg, and Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen 5-325 mg. The June 2023 MAR for Resident #5 documented medications scheduled to be given during 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-11 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
    Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
    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 prevent the use of a chair alarm to prevent falls from becoming a restraint for one (#45) of nine sampled residents reviewed for restraints. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 08/08/23, documented 47 residents resided in the facility. The Regional Nurse Consultant reported there were 9 residents with chair alarms. Findings: A Restraint and Non-Restraint Devices policy, revised 12/14/22, read in parts, .Non-restraint devices are devices that do not restrict the resident's freedom of movement .A Monthly Restraint/non-restraint Assessment .will be completed .to determine the continued need for the use of the restraint/non-restraint . Resident #45 had diagnoses that included history of falling, syncope and collapse, unspecified dementia of unspecified severity, with anxiety. A quarterly assessment, dated 05/24/23, documented Resident #45 was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance of 2 people for positioning, transfers, and ambulation. A Restorative Note, dated 06/26/23,…

    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
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

$8,278 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,278 — penalty dated 2025-04-25

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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to BRIDGES HEALTH — 33 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 53.6+0.4 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.5+0.5 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.4-0.4 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.0-1.0 vs chain
The other 32 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
1 of 5Brookwood Skilled Nursing and TherapyOklahoma City, OK 1 of 5The Timbers Skilled Nursing and TherapyEdmond, OK 2 of 5Ambassador Manor Nursing CenterTulsa, OK 2 of 5Grace Skilled Nursing and Therapy JenksJenks, OK 2 of 5Stillwater Creek Skilled Nursing And TherapyStillwater, OK 2 of 5The Grand at Bethany Skilled Nursing and TherapyBethany, OK 3 of 5Capitol Hill Skilled Nursing And TherapyOklahoma City, OK 3 of 5Claremore Skilled Nursing and TherapyClaremore, OK 3 of 5Fairmont Skilled Nursing and TherapyOklahoma City, OK 3 of 5Glenwood Skilled Nursing And TherapyGlenpool, OK 3 of 5The Springs Skilled Nursing And TherapyMuskogee, OK 3 of 5The Wilshire Skilled Nursing and TherapyOklahoma City, OK 4 of 5Bradford Village Healthcare CenterEdmond, OK 4 of 5Cottonwood Creek Skilled Nursing & TherapyChickasha, OK 4 of 5English Village Skilled Nursing And TherapyAltus, OK 4 of 5Heritage Skilled Nursing And TherapyTecumseh, OK 4 of 5Kingwood Skilled Nursing and TherapyOklahoma City, OK 4 of 5Magnolia Creek Skilled Nursing And TherapyAltus, OK 4 of 5Mid-Del Skilled Nursing And TherapyDel City, OK 4 of 5Sequoyah Pointe Skilled Nursing And TherapyTahlequah, OK 4 of 5St. Ann's Skilled Nursing And TherapyOklahoma City, OK 4 of 5The CommonsEnid, OK 4 of 5University Park Skilled Nursing And Therapy MemoryTahlequah, OK 4 of 5Wildewood Skilled Nursing and TherapyOklahoma City, OK 5 of 5Grace Skilled And Nursing Therapy NormanNorman, OK 5 of 5Holiday Heights HealthcareNorman, OK 5 of 5Mangum Skilled Nursing And TherapyMangum, OK 5 of 5River Oaks Skilled Nursing And TherapyEl Reno, OK 5 of 5River Valley Skilled Nursing And TherapyClinton, OK 5 of 5Senior Village HealthcareBlanchard, OK 5 of 5The Regency Skilled Nursing And TherapyShawnee, OK 5 of 5Western Skilled Nursing And TherapyBuffalo, OK

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
BRIDGES EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 12/31/2020
DEROIN, KRISTYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE—since 12/31/2020
COBLE, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL—since 12/31/2020
BRIDGES ESOP, INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL—since 12/31/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$5.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-9.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$416K
Related-party expense8% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 50%Medicare 12%Other / private 38%

This home reported $416K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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

$296per resident / day
operating cost
$9,005per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$271per 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

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.

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 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 375195. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-07-16, 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