Home / Oklahoma / Broken Arrow
3501 W Washington Street, Broken Arrow, OK 74012 · Tulsa County · (918) 250-5405
92 certified beds, about 75 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2008
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 375528 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on February 12, 2026, inspectors cited 15 health deficiencies (the Oklahoma average is 6.4, the national average 9.2).
None of its 31 health citations since September 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.36 hours per resident per day, against 3.79 across Oklahoma and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.30 of those hours.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 31 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments were accurate for 4 (#44, 57, 69 and #87) of 21 sampled residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to electronically submit resident assessments to CMS for 2 (#13 and #27) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for MDS submission. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure quarterly care plan meetings were held for 2 (#34 and #45) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for care plan meetings. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an explicit statement was included in the arbitration agreement which stated the residents were not required to sign to be admitted for 3 (#47, 67, and #95) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for binding arbitration agreements. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure binding arbitration agreements provided to residents and/or representative to sign including a stipulation for a neutral arbitrator to be chosen by both parties and for a venue for the arbitration at a location that is convenient to both parties for 3 (#47, 67, and #95) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for binding arbitration agreements. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to use enhanced barrier precautions when performing peg tube (a type of feeding tube inserted into the stomach through the abdominal wall) care, peg tube feeding, and the administration of medication via peg tube for 1 (#86) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for a feeding tube. The DON identified two residents had a feeding tube.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure ongoing side effect monitoring was completed for a resident receiving a psychotropic medication for 1 (#19) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The DON identified 60 residents received psychotropic medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of abuse was reported to the OSDH and local law enforcement within two hours of becoming aware of the allegation for 1 (#10) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of abuse was investigated timely and the alleged perpetrator was prevented from working with the alleged victim until the conclusion of the investigation for 1 (#10) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a written notice of transfer to a resident discharged to an acute care facility prior to transfer for 1 (#92) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for discharges. The DON identified 60 residents discharged during the three months prior to the survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was developed for 1 (#91) of 20 sampled residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to have a qualified activity director. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure refrigerator temperatures were recorded for 1 (medication room [ROOM NUMBER]) of 2 medication refrigerators observed for safe storage of medication. The DON identified two medication rooms with medication storage refrigerators in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a urine sample was not stored in a refrigerator used to store resident food for 1 (medication room [ROOM NUMBER]) of 2 sampled medication room food storage refrigerators observed for infection control. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the call light was operational for 1 (#94) of 3 sampled residents whose call lights were tested. The administrator identified 74 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure protected health information was secure for 1 (station 3 medication/treatment cart) of 2 medication/treatment carts on station 3. The administrator identifed 95 residents resided in the facility. On 05/30/25 at 9:15 a.m., a computer on top of an unattended medication/treatment cart at nurses station 3, was observed to be open and showed protected health information. On 05/30/25 at 9:20 a.m., CMA #1 closed the computer and stated they did not know where the nurse assigned to the cart was. On 05/30/25 at 9:30 a.m., the administrator stated the computer should not have been left open with resident information visible. On 05/30/25 at 9:36 a.m., RN #1, who was assigned to the medication/treatment cart, stated the computer should have been closed and not showing protected health information.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were secure for 1 (station 3 medication/treatment cart) of 2 medication/treatment carts on station 3. The administrator identifed 95 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to administer a cardiac medication as prescribed for one (#50) of 10 residents observed during a medication administration pass. The facility administrator identified 48 residents who were prescribed cardiac medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the physical environment of the kitchen and kitchen equipment were kept clean and maintained in good repair. The administrator identified 83 residents ate meals prepared in the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were assessed for the use of bed rails prior to installation for one (#11) of one resident who was reviewed for bed rails. The administrator identifed 52 residents using bed rails.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to to adhere to enhanced barrier precautions while providing wound care for one (#187) of one sampled resident reviewed for wound care. The administrator identified 83 residents resided in the facility and eight residents on enhanced barrier precautions. An undated facility Enhanced Barrier Precautions policy, documented high contact resident care activities such as wound care required the use of gown and gloves. Resident #187 had diagnoses which included a sacral pressure ulcer. On 11/07/24 at 10:19 a.m., RN #1 and LPN #3 prepared to treat Resident #187's pressure ulcer. Both sanitized their hands and donned gloves. Before wound care began, RN #1 was asked if there was any other infection control measures to take before starting wound care. RN #1 stated, No. RN #1 and LPN #3 did not don gowns. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to secure a surety bond with sufficient coverage for the account balance. The Business office manger identified 15 residents that have money in the trust account and were current residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to deposit resident personal funds in excess of $50 in an interest bearing account that is separate from the facility's operation accounts for one (# 1) of three residents reviewed for facility funds. The Business office manger identified 15 residents that have money in the trust account and were current residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were available for one (#5) of three residents reviewed for medication availability. The Administrator identified 76 residents in the facility who required medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to have an administrator of record. The administrator identified 76 residents who resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received showers as scheduled for four (#23, 34, 63, and #231) of five residents reviewed for ADLs. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide showers, incontinent care, and answer call lights in a timely manner for six (#34, 63, 23, 64, 65, and #231) of six residents reviewed for sufficient staffing to meet the needs of residents. The ''Resident Census and Conditions of Residents'' form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided in the facility. The form documented 15 residents were dependent on staff for bathing, 60 residents required one or two staff assistance with bathing, and 64 residents required assistance of one or two staff with toileting.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were available, per the pharmacy policy and procedure, for one (#233) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their abuse policy and procedures by failing to screen and obtain a background check on one (CMA #1) of five employees reviewed for screening upon hire. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided at the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan, within 48 hours of admission, for one (#231) of three residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, dated 09/21/23, documented 79 residents resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain registry verification for one (CMA #1) of five employee files reviewed for registry verification. On [DATE] at 1:10 p.m., the employee file for CMA #1 was reviewed and documented the CMA's certification had expired on [DATE]. The file documented the employee was hired on [DATE] to work as a CMA. On [DATE] at 1:25 p.m., administrator #2 reported the normal procedure for any new applicant was to try and obtain all new-hire paperwork and implement background checks within the first 24 hours. Administrator #2 stated he wasn't sure what happened with CMA #1 or why the proper protocol wasn't followed. The administrator stated if the proper protocol had been followed, the expired CMA certificate would have shown up. The administrator confirmed the CMA's certificate had expired on [DATE] and the CMA's hire date was [DATE].
16 fire safety citations on file: 6 on November 7, 2024, 7 on September 28, 2023, 3 on February 11, 2022.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Oklahoma | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.36 | 3.79 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.30 | 0.34 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.63 | 3.44 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.49 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.57 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 55.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 53.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.31 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.66 on weekdays and 2.63 on weekends, 28% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.25 in April to June 2025 to 3.36 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.36 | 0.30 | 3.66 | 2.63 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 75 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.70 | 0.25 | 3.95 | 3.07 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 76 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.91 | 0.27 | 4.10 | 3.41 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 72 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.25 | 0.31 | 4.24 | 4.27 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 84 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Oklahoma, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.79 | 0.32 | 3.94 | 3.42 | 2.2% | 1.6% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oklahoma, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $17.27 | $15.82 to $18.39 | 19,410 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $28.04 | $24.06 to $29.84 | 11,540 |
| Registered nurses | $39.87 | $37.19 to $47.55 | 38,270 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Oklahoma | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.8 | 13.6 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 2.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 4.7 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.5 | 13.7 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.0 | 4.7 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.4 | 17.5 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.6 | 27.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 34.9 | 16.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.4 | 2.3 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.4 | 3.0 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Senior Suites Healthcare's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (53.9% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
53.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Oklahoma: 24 better, 16 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 36 eligible stays.
9.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Oklahoma: 1 better, 9 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 58 eligible stays.
6.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Oklahoma: 0 better, 4 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 27 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Oklahoma54.3% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 7 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Oklahoma0.7% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 15 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Oklahoma2.4% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 15 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Oklahoma100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 4 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: COX BUILDING COMPANY, INC..
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cox Building Company, Inc. | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 05/01/2008 | |
| Cox, Steven | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 05/01/2008 | |
| Cox, Steven | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 05/21/2008 | |
| Cox, Steven | 5% or greater security interest | Individual | 05/21/2008 | |
| Cox, Steven | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 05/21/2008 | |
| Cox, Steven | Corporate director | Individual | 05/01/2008 | |
| Cox Building Company, Inc. | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/01/2008 | |
| Cox, Steven | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/21/2008 | |
| Cox Building Company, Inc. | General partnership interest | Organization | 05/01/2008 | |
| Cox, Steven | General partnership interest | Individual | 05/01/2008 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Oklahoma. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.