Citations in Oklahoma
Statistics, citations and compliance trends for long-term care facilities in Oklahoma.
Statistics for Oklahoma (Last 12 Months)
Financial Impact (Last 12 Months)
Latest citations in Oklahoma
Dirty Equipment, Vents, Ceilings, and Air Purifier: Surveyors observed mechanical lifts with dirt buildup, return air vents covered in dirt and dust, stained and damaged ceilings, and an air purifier covered in dirt and dried substance. In the dining area, a half wall and back wall had dried residue, and staff gave conflicting statements about who was responsible for cleaning the area and equipment. A lift in a resident room was also observed with dirt on the base and shaft.
A facility failed to report an alleged mistreatment during a resident’s hair grooming to the State Agency within the required timeframe. The resident had dementia, depression, severe cognitive impairment, and was dependent on staff for grooming and hygiene. Records showed a matted area of hair was removed, leaving a reddened scalp, and staff later described the event as an abuse allegation that should have been reported.
Failure to investigate alleged mistreatment during grooming: A resident with dementia, depression, and severe cognitive impairment was dependent on staff for grooming and hygiene. After a mat of hair was removed, the resident’s scalp was noted to be red and irritated, and staff later reported the resident was in pain after the hair was brushed out. The facility handled the issue as a grievance, but there was no documentation of a thorough abuse/mistreatment investigation, and the administrator later stated it should have been investigated as an abuse allegation.
Failure to Protect Resident from Verbal Abuse: An LPN yelled at a resident after the resident spit on a CNA, made scolding and threatening comments about jail, and was reported by multiple residents and staff as rude, mean, and verbally aggressive. Staff also reported the LPN said they were no longer in camera view and one witness stated the LPN slapped the resident's hand while yelling.
Failure to assign an infection preventionist. The facility’s infection preventionist resigned, and the administrator and DON stated that no one had been assigned or had accepted the duties of the position. The role remained unfilled, and no staff member had taken on the infection preventionist responsibilities.
Damaged and stained furniture in the memory care unit was observed during survey. Eight recliners had tears and cracks in the arms, and two couches in the dining area were stained, with one couch having a large slit exposing the cushion. An LPN and a CMA confirmed the furniture was worn and not in good condition.
Dirty Equipment, Vents, Ceilings, and Air Purifier
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that mechanical lifts were free from dirt and debris, return air vents were free from dirt and debris, ceilings were in good repair and free from stains, and an air purifier was free from dirt and stains. The administrator identified 26 residents in the facility. On 07/28/26, surveyors observed the half wall at the entry inside the dining room serving area covered with dried dark substance, the back wall with large areas of dried yellow substance, and a portable air purifier in front of the wall covered in dirt and dried dark brown substance. The return air vents in the dining area were also observed to be covered in dirt and dust. On the same date, the drop-down ceilings down hall 100 were observed with dark brown stains, and the sheetrock ceiling in the common area had tape separating from the seams with dark areas around the exposed sheetrock tape. A mechanical lift in Resident #26's room was observed with a build-up of dirt on the base and up the shaft. On 07/31/26, the same conditions were observed again in the dining area, hall 100, and the common area. The housekeeping supervisor stated the lifts needed to be cleaned and said they would clean equipment if needed, but they were usually the only one there and had laundry to keep up with. The maintenance supervisor stated they did not know who was responsible for cleaning the vents and said all the vents needed to be cleaned. The DON stated the air purifier would be placed on the cleaning schedule, and the dietary manager stated dietary would be responsible for cleaning the dietary area.
Failure to Report Alleged Mistreatment During Hair Grooming
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure an alleged mistreatment during grooming and hygiene was reported to the State Agency within two hours for one resident. The resident had diagnoses of dementia and depression, and a quarterly assessment showed a BIMS score of 3, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The assessment also showed the resident was dependent on staff for grooming and hygiene. A Concern/Grievance Report documented that a mat of hair was removed from the back of the resident’s head and a reddened area was noted afterward. A nurse’s progress note the same day stated the resident’s scalp was red and irritated and that the resident did not want to get up. The facility’s investigation records showed no documentation that the allegation of mistreatment during hair grooming was reported to the State Agency. During interviews, staff stated the resident had a matted area of hair that was brushed out, after which the resident was heard hollering in pain, and the administrator later stated the matter should have been reported as an abuse allegation.
Failure to Investigate Alleged Mistreatment During Hair Grooming
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure an alleged mistreatment during grooming and hygiene was thoroughly investigated for Resident #35. The resident had diagnoses of dementia and depression, and a quarterly assessment dated 10/31/25 showed a BIMS score of 3, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The assessment also showed the resident was dependent on staff for grooming and hygiene. A Concern/Grievance Report dated 11/19/25 documented that a mat of hair was removed from the back of the resident’s head and a reddened area was noted afterward, and a nurse’s progress note from the same day stated the resident’s scalp was red and irritated and that the resident did not want to get up. A review of the facility’s abuse and mistreatment investigations from 07/01/25 through 07/02/26 showed no documentation that the allegation of mistreatment related to brushing out the resident’s matted hair was investigated. During interviews, an LPN stated the allegation of mistreatment involved Resident #35 being mistreated while their matted hair was brushed and said the allegation was investigated, while the administrator stated the issue had been completed as a grievance and was caused by the matting of the hair and removing it. A CNA stated the resident often refused care, had a mat in their hair, and was hollering in pain the next morning after someone brushed it out. The administrator later stated the matter should have been investigated like an abuse allegation.
Failure to Protect Resident from Verbal Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from verbal abuse by an LPN during an incident in which the resident had spit in the face of a CNA. According to the report, the LPN yelled at the resident, told the resident that spitting on staff was against the law and could lead to jail, and made statements that staff described as scolding. One CNA reported the LPN asked to close the door and then said, "We're not in the view of the camera now" followed by explicit language. Another staff member reported hearing the LPN yell and say the resident would not go back to bed, while a third staff member stated the LPN was yelling and slapped the resident's hand. Multiple resident statements described the LPN as rude, mean, cranky, and verbally aggressive toward residents, and one resident reported hearing the LPN yell and threaten that someone could go to jail. The administrator stated that residents and staff were scared of the LPN, and that the investigation team found there was a problem with the LPN. The DON also stated that no residents had complaints when asked in resident council, but the report includes several resident and staff statements describing the LPN's yelling and rude behavior toward residents.
Failure to Assign an Infection Preventionist
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a qualified employee was assigned to perform the duties of infection preventionist for the infection prevention and control program. The policy titled Infection Preventionist stated that the infection preventionist is responsible for coordinating the implementation and updating of the facility’s infection prevention and control policies and procedures. Record review showed the infection preventionist was terminated, with the last day worked on 07/20/26. The administrator stated on 07/22/26 that the infection preventionist had resigned that morning and that no one had been assigned to perform those duties at that time. The DON later stated on 07/28/26 that the former infection preventionist had abruptly resigned and that no one had accepted the duties of the position. The administrator also stated on 07/28/26 that the position had not been filled and no one had taken on the duties of infection preventionist.
Damaged and Stained Furniture in Memory Care Unit
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure furniture in the memory care unit was kept clean, maintained in good repair, and reflected a home-like environment. The DON identified 17 residents living in the unit. Surveyors observed eight recliners in the common area with small tears and small cracks on each arm of each recliner. In the dining area, two couches were observed with multiple dark stains, and the couch on the right had a large slit in the upholstery exposing the cushion inside. Staff later confirmed the furniture was worn and damaged, with the couches stained and the recliners having tears and cracks in the arms.
Find your facility
Search by name to see its inspection history, citations and penalties — and how to prepare for the next survey.
Get alerted when Immediate Jeopardy citations hit in Oklahoma — free
You're all set
Compliance trends in Oklahoma
Data through Jun 2026Comparisons below measure the most recent period Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 against the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025 (two equal 12-month windows). The most recent 1 months are excluded because CMS is still publishing them.
Top tags by month · last 24 months
dashed = still reportingMonthly citation counts for the 5 most-cited tags. The dashed tail is the 1-month reporting lag.
Frequency movers
Biggest change in how often each tag is cited, as a rate per 100 inspections (so it isn't skewed by survey volume): Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. Only tags with at least 20 citations in both periods are shown.
Severity movers
Tags whose average scope/severity shifted the most: Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. The number is the average severity on the A–L scale (A=0…L=11); the letter is the band it falls in. A rise means the same tag is being cited at a more serious level — note the average can move enough to rank here while staying within the same letter. Same 20-citation minimum applies.
Care domain movers
Citations grouped into CFR care domains — F-tags by their §483 regulatory section (CMS State Operations Manual, Appendix PP) — measured as a rate per 100 inspections: Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. Share is the domain's portion of citations this period; avg severity is the mean scope/severity letter and immediate jeopardy the percentage cited at J–L, both over the current period. Domains with at least 20 citations in both periods are shown; the sparkline tracks the last 12 months (left = oldest).
Immediate jeopardies · this period
Citations at the most serious scope/severity — J–L, immediate jeopardy, residents placed at risk of serious harm or death — over Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. "Surveys with an IJ" counts distinct health inspections that had at least one.
Survey activity · by month
faded/dashed = still reportingCitations each month split into complaint-driven (unscheduled, triggered by grievances) vs standard surveys — bars, left axis — with the number of inspections as a line on the right axis. Rising inspections signal more scrutiny; a rising complaint share means more off-cycle surveys. The most recent 1 months are still being reported.
Deficiency-free survey rate
Share of health surveys that found zero deficiencies — the odds of a clean survey. Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025; the most recent 1 months are still being reported (dashed).
Penalties · by month
faded = still reportingTotal civil money penalty dollars imposed on the state's facilities each month — how hard the state is enforcing. The most recent 1 months are still being reported, and penalties often lag citations by several months.
Emerging tags
Tags that weren't established last period but surged — an early warning, distinct from movers (which track already-common tags). Criteria: fewer than 20 citations in the prior period, but at least 10 this period and 2.5× their prior volume. The sparkline shows monthly counts over the last 12 months (left = oldest).
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release October 8, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
In your survey window? See what surveyors are citing.
The Survey-Prep Report maps your facility's risk from 12 months of CMS and state citation data — what's being cited around you and what to check first. $129 one-time.
