OklahomaOklahoma City

Baptist Village of Oklahoma City

9700 Mashburn Blvd, Oklahoma City, OK 73162 · Oklahoma County · 120 certified beds · avg 96 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 2000

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
4
Serious findings on record
$28,695
Fines, last 3 years
7.03
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, repeated · Jul 19, 2024 · F-0689

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.

Corrected: Aug 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 1, 2025 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Sep 23, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jul 19, 2024 · F-0688

The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.

Why it matters: Without this care, residents can develop stiff, contracted joints and lose the ability to move on their own.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Aug 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jul 19, 2024 · F-0758

The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits.

Why it matters: Unneeded psychiatric medications can leave residents overly sedated and raise the risk of falls and other serious harm.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Aug 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (25)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Oct 1, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Oct 1, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Oct 16, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · from a complaint
Oct 16, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint
Jul 19, 2024▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jul 19, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Jul 19, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits.
Jul 19, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician.
Jul 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
Jul 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss.
Jul 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately.
Jul 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman.
Jul 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly.
Jul 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jul 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly.
Jul 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jul 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
Jul 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights.
Jul 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate.
Jul 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Jul 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required.
Jul 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
Jul 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day.
Jul 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Jul 19, 2024C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (21 → 2).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2024233K ▲
202521G ▲

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

2 fines totaling $28,695.

DateTypeAmount / length
Oct 1, 2025Fine$10,358
Jul 19, 2024Fine$18,337

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityOklahoma avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)7.034.583.95top 1% in Oklahoma; top 1% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.500.410.69top 26% in Oklahoma; bottom 37% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing6.064.163.50top 1% in Oklahoma; top 2% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.290.280.48top 34% in Oklahoma; bottom 30% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)54.955.545.8top 48% in Oklahoma; bottom 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)42.953.642.9top 34% in Oklahoma; bottom 49% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 6.15, RN 0.43, weekend 5.29. Staffing rating: 4/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Baptist Village Retirement Communities of Oklahoma, INCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%09/26/1993
Abbott, PaulIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/18/2025
Abbott, PaulIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/18/2025
BancfirstOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE07/08/2013
BancfirstOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/12/2025
Baptist Village Retirement Communities of Oklahoma, INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/26/1993
Baptist Village Retirement Communities of Oklahoma, INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/26/1993
Barrett, JeanIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/19/2024
Barrett, JeanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/19/2024
Bell, KevinIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/17/2020
Bell, KevinIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/17/2020
Briggs, ParnieceIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/18/2025
Briggs, ParnieceIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/18/2025
Burrows, DougIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/18/2025
Burrows, DougIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/18/2025
Davis, FrankIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/29/2022
Davis, FrankIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/29/2022
Enlow, LindaIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/28/2023
Enlow, LindaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/28/2023
Fisher, ToddIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/30/2021

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
The Health Center at Concordia0.4 miOklahoma City, OK★★★★★5/5
St. Ann's Skilled Nursing and Therapy0.5 miOklahoma City, OK★★★★☆4/5
The Lakes2.1 miOklahoma City, OK★★☆☆☆2/5
Heritage at Brandon Place Health & Rehabilitation2.8 miOklahoma City, OK★★☆☆☆2/5
Warr Acres Nursing Center2.9 miOklahoma City, OK★★★☆☆3/5
Bellevue Health & Rehabilitation Center4.6 miOklahoma City, OK★★★☆☆3/5
Ignite Medical Resort Okc, LLC4.7 miOklahoma City, OK★★☆☆☆3/5
The Grand at Bethany Skilled Nursing and Therapy4.7 miBethany, OK★★☆☆☆2/5
Heritage Manor5.0 miOklahoma City, OK★☆☆☆☆2/5
Heritage Park5.4 miBethany, OK★☆☆☆☆2/5
Tuscany Village Nursing Center5.5 miOklahoma City, OK★☆☆☆☆1/5
Northwest Nursing Center5.7 miOklahoma City, OK★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Oklahoma City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 375381.