RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY

1901 PARKVIEW DRIVE, EL RENO, OK 73036 (405) 262-2833
For profit - Partnership 120 Beds BRIDGES HEALTH Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
90/100
#22 of 282 in OK
Last Inspection: April 2025

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

River Oaks Skilled Nursing and Therapy in El Reno, Oklahoma, has an excellent Trust Grade of A, meaning it is highly recommended for families looking for care. Ranked #22 out of 282 facilities in Oklahoma, it is in the top half, and it holds the top position in Canadian County, indicating a strong local reputation. The facility is improving, with issues decreasing from four in 2022 to just one in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength with a 4/5 star rating and a 30% turnover rate, which is significantly better than the state average of 55%. On the downside, there have been some concerns, including a medication cart that was left unlocked and a failure to administer the correct amount of tube feeding for a resident, which could pose risks to safety and health. Overall, while there are some weaknesses, the facility's strengths and positive trends make it a notable option.

Trust Score
A
90/100
In Oklahoma
#22/282
Top 7%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Getting Better
4 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
30% turnover. Near Oklahoma's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Oklahoma facilities.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 13 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Oklahoma. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
✓ Good
Only 5 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★★★★
5.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2022: 4 issues
2025: 1 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (30%)

    18 points below Oklahoma average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 30%

15pts below Oklahoma avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: BRIDGES HEALTH

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 5 deficiencies on record

Apr 2025 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

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 medications were secured/locked when not atten...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were secured/locked when not attended to for 1 (hall 200) of 2 medication/treatment carts observed for medication storage. The administrator identified 69 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 04/15/25 at 10:19 a.m., a medication cart was observed unlocked on hall 200 in front of room [ROOM NUMBER]. There was no staff present. A policy titled Storage of Medications, dated 01/2022, read in part, Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely .The medication supply is accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications .Medication carts and medication supplies are locked when not attended by persons with authorized access. On 04/15/25 at 10:20 a.m., ACMA #1 returned to the cart and was asked if the medication cart was locked. They looked and stated, No, I thought I locked it as the top drawer does not always lock. I just pushed it in and it must have popped open when I walked away. ACMA #1 was asked if it was reported to maintenance. They stated it had not been reported as it happened this morning. ACMA #1 stated they did not normally work on that cart and their pharmacy consultant was currently there and they were going to report it to them. On 04/15/25 at 10:23 a.m., ACMA #1 stated they alerted the pharmacy consultant immediately.
Dec 2022 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Tube Feeding (Tag F0693)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician prescribed about of formula was administered to one (#2) of two sampled resident reviewed for nutrition....

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician prescribed about of formula was administered to one (#2) of two sampled resident reviewed for nutrition. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 12/06/22, documented two residents required tube feedings. Findings: Resident #2 had diagnoses which included aphasia and protein calorie malnutrition. A Resident Assessment, dated 09/12/22, documented the resident received tube feedings. A Physician's Order, dated 10/21/22, read in parts, .Enteral Feed .four times a day Give 1.5 cartons (350 cc) Glucerna 1.5 via peg tube Q 6hrs for PROTIEN [sic] -CALORIE MANLNUTRION [sic] . On 12/07/22 at 8:43 a.m., LPN #1 was observed to pour Glucerna 1.5 into a water pitcher that was marked in ounces and cc's. The amount of formula LPN #1 poured into the water pitcher measured halfway between the 300 cc mark and the 350 cc mark, and halfway between the 10 and 12 ounce mark. LPN #1 was observed to look at the formula and stated, 350, right? LPN #1 was observed to administer the 325 cc's of formula to Resident #2. On 12/07/22 at 9:12 a.m., the DON was asked how staff ensured they administered the physician ordered amount of formula. She stated by checking the orders and measuring the formula using a graduated measuring container. She was made aware of the above observation.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure clean plates and bowls were stored inverted or covered to prevent exposure to contamination. The Resident Census and Conditions of Resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure clean plates and bowls were stored inverted or covered to prevent exposure to contamination. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 12/06/22, documented 74 residents resided in the facility and two residents received tube feedings. Findings: Title 310. Oklahoma State Department of Health, Chapter 257. Food Establishments, 310:257-7-105. Equipment, utensils, linens, and single-service and single-use articles, read in part, .(b) Clean equipment and utensils shall be stored .(2) Covered or inverted . On 12/07/22 at 10:44 a.m., clean plates were observed in the plate holder with the food surface side up. Additional clean plates and bowls were observed stacked along the side of the steam table with the food surface side up. On 12/07/22 at 10:45 a.m., the Dietary Manager was asked where clean dishes were stored after they were air dried. The Dietary Manager pointed out the clean serving plates uncovered and not inverted stored in the plate holder. They were asked if the dishes were stored properly. The Dietary Manager stated, Yes. They were informed that clean dishes are required to be stored inverted or covered. They stated, I will correct it right away.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0921)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the laundry room was maintained in safe operating conditions by not cleaning out the lint traps for two of two dryers observed. The Re...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the laundry room was maintained in safe operating conditions by not cleaning out the lint traps for two of two dryers observed. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 12/06/22, documented 74 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 12/08/22 at 11:59 a.m., a tour of the laundry room was conducted. An observation was made of two dryers in the laundry room. There was a build up of half an inch to one inch of lint observed on the floor once the lids to the lint traps were opened. Housekeeper #1, who was present during the observation, stated that they weren't sure when the lint traps were last cleaned. They were asked to provide the cleaning log for the lint traps and were unable to locate the log. The dryer vent lid had a sticker that read it was to be cleaned every day. On 12/08/22 at 12:10 p.m., the Maintenance Supervisor stated there used to be a cleaning schedule posted in the laundry room. A cleaning log was not located. The Maintenance Supervisor stated they cleaned the lint traps every Friday. He was asked how often the lint traps should be cleaned. The Maintenance Supervisor stated they were unsure. On 12/08/22 at 1:26 p.m., the Administrator stated there was not a policy on cleaning the lint traps.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

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 provide maintenance services necessary to ensure the ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide maintenance services necessary to ensure the following: a. a sanitary and comfortable interior for one (#20) of 24 sampled residents reviewed for homelike environment, and b. odors did not linger on one unit (Route 66- Hall 300) of three units observed for odors. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 12/06/22, documented there were 74 residents residing in the facility. There were 27 residents residing on Route 66 - Hall 300. Findings: A Maintenance policy, dated 06/27/06, read in parts, .This facility shall provide a safe, functional, sanitary and comfortable environment for residents .and assure the good repair of the entire facility . 1. Resident #20 had diagnoses which included hypertension and heart disease. A Comprehensive Resident Assessment, dated 06/16/22, documented Resident #20's cognition was moderately impaired. On 12/06/22 at 1:37 p.m., Resident #20 was observed in their room. There was a blanket observed to be rolled up on the floor between the toilet and the wall in their bathroom. The base board was pulled away from the wall and the drywall was wet and deteriorated behind the base board. Resident #20 was asked why the blanket was on the bathroom floor. They stated there had been a leak next to the toilet for about two to three weeks. Resident #20 was asked if staff were aware of the issue. They stated they must be, because they were the ones putting the blankets down. A Completed Work Orders log, dated January 2022 through November 2022, had no documentation of the water leak in Resident #20's bathroom. On 12/07/22 at 12:49 p.m., the Maintenance Supervisor was shown Resident #20's room and asked why the blanket was on the floor. He stated he didn't know why the blanket was there, but the wall looked wet. He was asked if anyone had reported this issue to him. He stated, No, but it looks like I need to get on it. On 12/07/22 at 12:55 p.m., the Administrator was shown Resident #20's bathroom with the rolled up blanket between the toilet and the wall, baseboard pulled away from the wall, and the drywall wet and deteriorated. The Administrator stated she was not aware of the issue and would call the plumber. 2. On 12/06/22 at 10:00 a.m., upon arriving on hall 300, a strong urine odor was noted in the hallway at the nurses' station. On 12/06/22 at 12:00 p.m., a strong urine odor was noted when passing 300 hall nursing station and in the sitting area on hall 300. A strong urine odor could be smelled in the hall outside of room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 12/07/22 at 8:07 a.m., a strong urine odor was noticed in the 300 hall at the nurses' station. RN #1 was observed at nurses' station on hall 300. RN #1 was asked if they smelled an odor in the hallway. They stated, That urine smell may be coming from room [ROOM NUMBER]. I see the housekeepers are in there two to three times a day. That gentleman has a dog and he's not a very clean person. On 12/07/22 at 8:10 a.m., the floor tech was observed cleaning the floor around the nurses' station on hall 300. They were asked if they smelled an odor in the hallway. The floor tech stated, I do not smell anything, but I will check around for a possible cause. On 12/07/22 at 8:46 a.m., there was a very strong urine odor on hall 300 between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]. On 12/07/22 at 11:07 a.m., the DON was asked about the strong urine odor present around the nurses' station on hall 300. The DON stated they were aware of the lingering odor on Route 66 [hall 300] near the nurses' station. They were asked what the facility policy was on maintaining an odor-free environment. The DON stated, Housekeeping should address problems with odors immediately when present. They were asked what was causing the strong urine odor around the nurses' station on hall 300. The DON stated, There are two residents on that unit that urinate on the floor. When we see the problem we try to address it immediately. All the rooms have individual heaters and that makes it worse. She was asked what was being done to eliminate the problem. The DON stated, We try to educate and investigate as much as we can. We have increased cleaning and changing of residents there. We have increased housekeeping hours on that unit during the week and on the weekends. We moved the DON office to that hall to help monitor and improve opportunities for education. On 12/08/22 at 8:17 a.m., the Administrator stated the tile in rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] had odors trapped in them from the lift station backing up into the rooms the through the toilets. She stated the lift station has been repaired multiple times, but the tile continued to have the odors trapped in it. She stated they had increased housekeeping in those rooms, but due to the smell being trapped in the tile, they were unable to get rid of the odor.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

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

Strengths
  • • Grade A (90/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Oklahoma.
  • • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Oklahoma facilities.
  • • Only 5 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
Concerns
  • • No significant concerns identified. This facility shows no red flags across CMS ratings, staff turnover, or federal penalties.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY 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 River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy Staffed?

CMS rates RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 30%, compared to the Oklahoma average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy?

State health inspectors documented 5 deficiencies at RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY during 2022 to 2025. These included: 5 with potential for harm.

Who Owns and Operates River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy?

RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by BRIDGES HEALTH, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 70 residents (about 58% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in EL RENO, Oklahoma.

How Does River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy Compare to Other Oklahoma Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Oklahoma, RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 2.7, staff turnover (30%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy?

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 River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY 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 River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy Stick Around?

RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY has a staff turnover rate of 30%, which is about average for Oklahoma nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy Ever Fined?

RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is River Oaks Skilled Nursing And Therapy on Any Federal Watch List?

RIVER OAKS SKILLED NURSING AND THERAPY 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.