How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Cedarcrest Care Center
1306 East College, Broken Arrow, OK 74012 (opens Google Maps) · Tulsa County · (918) 251-3200· 89 certified beds · avg 58 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1995 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 27, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.27
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · how star ratings work →
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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 28 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint F-0726
The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. F-0727
The 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. F-0732
View all 28 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726 |
| May 27, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727 |
| May 27, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The 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. · F-0732 |
| May 27, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The 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. · F-0838 |
| May 27, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not properly protect the personal money residents deposited with it for safekeeping. · F-0570 |
| May 27, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0880 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Mar 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610 |
| Aug 23, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Aug 23, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610 |
| Aug 23, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Aug 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint · F-0607 |
| Aug 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Feb 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
| Feb 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Feb 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0880 |
| Nov 22, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jan 9, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865 |
| Jan 9, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · F-0868 |
| Jan 9, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. · F-0886 |
| Jan 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0880 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 13).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 14 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 1 | 0 | E |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityOklahoma averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.27
Oklahoma average: 4.58
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.44
Oklahoma average: 0.41
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.94
Oklahoma average: 4.16
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Oklahoma avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.27 | 4.58 | 3.95 | top 17% in Oklahoma; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.44 | 0.41 | 0.69 | top 37% in Oklahoma; bottom 29% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.94 | 4.16 | 3.50 | top 15% in Oklahoma; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.38 | 0.28 | 0.48 | top 15% in Oklahoma; bottom 49% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 59.5 | 55.5 | 45.8 | bottom 37% in Oklahoma; bottom 17% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 20.0 | 53.6 | 42.9 | top 10% in Oklahoma; top 13% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — 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 4.20, RN 0.35, weekend 3.94.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.20 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Cedarcrest Care Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Partnership
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bagwell, Shelly | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 12/17/2011 |
| Heidinger, Laura | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 7% | 12/17/2011 |
| Heidinger, Nicholas | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 12/17/2011 |
| Heidinger, Patricia | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 12/17/2011 |
| Ross, Ladonna | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 33% | 12/17/2011 |
| Anderson, Stacie | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/20/2012 |
| Sommers, Felicia | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/17/2011 |
| Venable, Leslie | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Venable, Leslie | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
All 9 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
- "How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"
- "Where do you post your daily staffing numbers, and can I see today's?"
- "How do you decide you have enough staff and resources for your resident population, including nights and weekends?"
- "How is residents' personal money protected and tracked, and how can families review the account statements?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
- "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 60% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 39 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Broken Arrow Nursing Home, INC | 1.2 mi | Broken Arrow, OK | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Village Health Care Center | 1.5 mi | Broken Arrow, OK | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Aspen Health and Rehab | 1.8 mi | Broken Arrow, OK | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Franciscan Villa | 2.8 mi | Broken Arrow, OK | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Senior Suites Healthcare | 3.5 mi | Broken Arrow, OK | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Forest Hills Care and Rehabilitation Center | 3.8 mi | Broken Arrow, OK | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Ignite Medical Resort Tulsa, LLC | 5.3 mi | Tulsa, OK | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Cottage Extended Care | 6.3 mi | Tulsa, OK | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Leisure Village Health Care Center | 7.0 mi | Tulsa, OK | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Tulsa Nursing Center | 7.6 mi | Tulsa, OK | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Tulsa Center for Rehabilitation and Healthcare | 7.6 mi | Tulsa, OK | ★★☆☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Montereau, INC. | 7.6 mi | Tulsa, OK | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Tulsa, OK — 33 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Colonial Manor Nursing Home — Tulsa, OK · overall 4/5
- Emerald Care Center Tulsa — Tulsa, OK · overall 1/5
- Glenwood Skilled Nursing and Therapy — Glenpool, OK · overall 3/5
- Grace Skilled Nursing and Therapy Jenks — Jenks, OK · overall 2/5
- Gracewood Health & Rehab — Tulsa, OK · overall 2/5abuse
- Green Country Care Center — Tulsa, OK · overall 2/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 375233.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).