BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Beadles New Beginnings in Alva, Oklahoma, has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is considered above average and recommended for families seeking care. The facility ranks #2 out of 282 nursing homes in Oklahoma, placing it in the top half, and is #1 of 2 in Woods County, indicating it is the best local option. The facility is improving, having reduced its issues from one in 2023 to none in 2024, and it has a solid staffing rating with a turnover rate of 0%, well below the state average, showing that staff members tend to stay long-term. However, there are some concerns, including a fine of $9,438, which is average, and issues noted in inspections, such as failure to submit accurate staffing information and not having a proper care plan for a resident with specific medical needs. Overall, while Beadles New Beginnings has strengths in staffing and rankings, families should be aware of these compliance issues.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Oklahoma
- #2/282
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- Turnover data not reported for this facility.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $9,438 in fines. Higher than 88% of Oklahoma facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 42 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Oklahoma. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 11 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
The Ugly 11 deficiencies on record
Jul 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Data
(Tag F0851)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to submit direct care staffing information based on payroll data.
The Resident Census and Conditions of Resident, dated 07/25/23 documented t...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2022
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a code status was designated for one (#8) of three residents sampled for advance directives.
The Resident Census and Conditions of Re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to notify the State Health Care Authority of a resident with a new seri...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to update the care plan for one (#11) of one sampled resident reviewed for falls.
The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents documented 3...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to develop and implement fall interventions for one (#11) of one resident reviewed for falls.
The Resident Census and Conditions...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the pharmacist provided monthly medication regimen reviews (MRRs) and failed to ensure the physician responded to the MRRs for one (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
4. Resident #11 had diagnoses which included paraplegia, nutritional deficiency, and altered mental status.
An admission assessment, dated 04/20/22, documented the resident had an ostomy, moderate cog...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide permanently affixed compartment for storage of refrigerated controlled drugs.
The Census and Conditions of Residents report document...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Laboratory Services
(Tag F0770)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
2. Resident #24's physician order, dated 05/14/21, documented to inject B-12 1000 mcg/ml on the 14th of every month for a diagnosis of anemia.
A physician order, dated 01/03/22, documented to collect...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, and served in a san...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
3. Res #11 had diagnoses which included paraplegia and nutritional deficiency.
An admission assessment, dated 04/20/22, documented the resident had an ostomy, moderate cognitive impairment, and requi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Grade B+ (88/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Oklahoma.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • 11 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Beadles New Beginnings's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Oklahoma, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Beadles New Beginnings Staffed?
CMS rates BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes.
What Have Inspectors Found at Beadles New Beginnings?
State health inspectors documented 11 deficiencies at BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS during 2022 to 2023. These included: 11 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Beadles New Beginnings?
BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 80 certified beds and approximately 29 residents (about 36% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in ALVA, Oklahoma.
How Does Beadles New Beginnings Compare to Other Oklahoma Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Oklahoma, BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 2.7 and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Beadles New Beginnings?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Beadles New Beginnings Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Oklahoma. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Beadles New Beginnings Stick Around?
BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS has not reported staff turnover data to CMS. Staff turnover matters because consistent caregivers learn residents' individual needs, medications, and preferences. When staff frequently change, this institutional knowledge is lost. Families should ask the facility directly about their staff retention rates and average employee tenure.
Was Beadles New Beginnings Ever Fined?
BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS has been fined $9,438 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Oklahoma average of $33,173. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Beadles New Beginnings on Any Federal Watch List?
BEADLES NEW BEGINNINGS is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.