SOUTH PARK EAST
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
South Park East has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided at this nursing home. It ranks #182 out of 282 facilities in Oklahoma, placing it in the bottom half of the state, and #25 out of 39 in Oklahoma County, meaning there are only a few local options that are better. The facility is showing an improving trend, with the number of issues decreasing from 7 in 2024 to 4 in 2025, but it still has serious problems. Staffing has an average rating of 3 out of 5, with a turnover rate of 57%, which is typical for the state, and there are no fines on record, indicating no recent compliance issues. However, the inspector found critical incidents, including failures to protect residents from inappropriate behavior between residents and inadequate investigations of abuse allegations, which raises serious concerns about resident safety.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Oklahoma
- #182/282
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 57% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Oklahoma facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 18 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Oklahoma. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 23 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Oklahoma average (2.6)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
11pts above Oklahoma avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
9 points above Oklahoma average of 48%
The Ugly 23 deficiencies on record
Sept 2025
4 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
On 09/09/25, an IJ situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to provide protection from sexual abuse/inappropriate touching from two residents towards three residents sampled...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's family was notified of an allegation of abuse for 1 (#5) of 7 sampled residents reviewed for abuse.The administrator id...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to revise/update care plan timely following incidents of abuse for 1 (#1) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for abuse allegations.The administra...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse were thoroughly investigated for 5 (#1, 2, 3, 4, and #5) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The adminis...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
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 accurately code physical therapy minutes on a quarterly resident as...
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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure:
a. a gait belt was used during a transfer for one (#16); and
b. neurological checks were completed after a fall with ...
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
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure an oxygen tank was not stored in a resident's room for one (#12) of one sampled resident observed for oxygen tanks.
Th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0730
(Tag F0730)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete a nurse aide performance review once every 12 months for one (CNA #2) of five employee files reviewed.
The Employee Information Re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0772
(Tag F0772)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure laboratory tests were completed as ordered for one (#26) of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
The DON ide...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staffing information, which included the facility name, date, actual hours worked for RNs, LPNs, CNAs, and the resident...
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
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food items were dated, labeled, and not left open to air in the cooler located in the kitchen for one of two kitchen o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
12 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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity during the evening meal service for one (#10) of four sampled residents reviewed f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide the appropriate liability notice prior to a resident coming off of skilled services for one (#12) of two sampled residents reviewed...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0637
(Tag F0637)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete a significant change assessment after a resident decline for one (#24) of fifteen sampled resident reviewed for assessments.
The R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0676
(Tag F0676)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate assistance to residents who required supervision during meal service for one (#10) of four sampled residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0772
(Tag F0772)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain physician ordered labs for one (#1) of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
The Resident Census and Conditio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure menus are followed.
The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 01/25/23, documented 24 residents.
Fi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0838
(Tag F0838)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to update the Facility Assessment at least annually.
The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 01/25/23, documented 24 res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure personal care was provided in a manner which prevented cross contamination for one (#16) of three sampled resident obs...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure;
A. physician ordered supplements were provided and
B. meal and supplement percentages were documented for two (#10 a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure;
A. medication was administered as ordered for one (#1) and
B. blood pressure was monitored prior to the administration of a medicat...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Deficiency F0802
(Tag F0802)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to:
A. provide adequate staff to assist residents with dining for one of one meal service observed and
B. ensure the dietary sta...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared by methods that conserved nutritive value.
The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 01/25/23, ...
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?"
- "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
- "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
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Oklahoma facilities.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 23 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • Grade F (18/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 57% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is South Park East's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SOUTH PARK EAST an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 South Park East Staffed?
CMS rates SOUTH PARK EAST's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 57%, which is 11 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 South Park East?
State health inspectors documented 23 deficiencies at SOUTH PARK EAST during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 22 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 South Park East?
SOUTH PARK EAST 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 PHOENIX HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 47 certified beds and approximately 34 residents (about 72% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in OKLAHOMA CITY, Oklahoma.
How Does South Park East Compare to Other Oklahoma Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Oklahoma, SOUTH PARK EAST's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (57%) 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 South Park East?
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?" "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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 substantiated abuse finding on record, and the facility's high staff turnover rate.
Is South Park East Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SOUTH PARK EAST has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 2-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 South Park East Stick Around?
Staff turnover at SOUTH PARK EAST is high. At 57%, the facility is 11 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 South Park East Ever Fined?
SOUTH PARK EAST 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 South Park East on Any Federal Watch List?
SOUTH PARK EAST 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.