BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Beaver County Nursing Home has received an F grade for its trust score, indicating significant concerns about the facility's quality of care. Ranked #196 of 282 in Oklahoma, it falls in the bottom half of nursing homes in the state, and it is the only option in Beaver County. The facility is worsening, with reported issues increasing from 5 in 2022 to 8 in 2024. Staffing is a concern, with a poor rating of 1 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 60%, which is about average for the state. Notable incidents include a critical finding where a resident fell while transferring independently, resulting in a serious injury, and failures in maintaining safe food temperatures, which could lead to foodborne illnesses. Overall, while there are some aspects of average RN coverage, the significant issues and critical incidents raise serious red flags for potential residents and their families.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Oklahoma
- #196/282
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 60% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $15,642 in fines. Higher than 91% of Oklahoma facilities. Major compliance failures.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 25 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Oklahoma. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Oklahoma average (2.6)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
13pts above Oklahoma avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
12 points above Oklahoma average of 48%
The Ugly 13 deficiencies on record
Dec 2024
8 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** An IJ was identified from 12/11/24 through 12/12/24. The deficient practice remained at isolated level of a potential for harm.
...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
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 ensure a resident's physician and family representative was notifie...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility policy to change O2 tubing was fo...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a diuretic and blood pressure medication were administered per physician's orders for one (#11) of three sampled resid...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were individualized and revised after a f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure RN coverage for eight consecutive hours, seven days per week.
The administrator identified 35 residents resided in the facility.
Fi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a medication rate of less than 5%. A total of 25 opportunities were observed during the medication pass with two error...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, records review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff washed their hands between residents wh...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2022
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure FSBS was obtained prior to administering sliding scale insulin for one (#41) of one sampled resident reviewed for insu...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow up on a physician's response on a GDR for one (#17) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
The Resident Census and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to report and investigate an injury of unknow origin for one (#24) of one sampled resident reviewed for abuse.
The Resident Cens...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to assess, monitor and intervene for an injury of unknown origin for one (#24) of one sampled resident reviewed for injury.
The ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to:
a. ensure temperatures were obtained and foods were held at 135 degrees on the holding table, and
b. ensure dishes and utens...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 13 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $15,642 in fines. Above average for Oklahoma. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade F (26/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Beaver County's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Oklahoma, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Beaver County Staffed?
CMS rates BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 60%, which is 13 percentage points above the Oklahoma average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at Beaver County?
State health inspectors documented 13 deficiencies at BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME during 2022 to 2024. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 12 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Beaver County?
BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME 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 62 certified beds and approximately 34 residents (about 55% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in BEAVER, Oklahoma.
How Does Beaver County Compare to Other Oklahoma Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Oklahoma, BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (60%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Beaver County?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Beaver County Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Oklahoma. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Beaver County Stick Around?
Staff turnover at BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME is high. At 60%, the facility is 13 percentage points above the Oklahoma average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Beaver County Ever Fined?
BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME has been fined $15,642 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Oklahoma average of $33,235. 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 Beaver County on Any Federal Watch List?
BEAVER COUNTY NURSING HOME 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.