120 West Versa, Hollis, OK 73550 (opens Google Maps) · Harmon County · (580) 688-9431· 92 certified beds · avg 37 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1978 · Medicaid only — not Medicare certified
Certified for Medicaid only. It cannot bill Medicare, so a short post-hospital rehabilitation stay would not be covered the usual way here. Who pays for nursing home care →
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 8, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 17, 2023
$0
Fines, last 3 years
—
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: May 18, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 13 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. F-0698
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
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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 complaintF-0609
View all 13 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
Jan 8, 2026
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Jan 8, 2026
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
Oct 15, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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
Jun 7, 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
Jun 7, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · from a complaint · F-0943
Jun 1, 2024
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851
Jun 1, 2024
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
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
Jun 1, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640
Jun 1, 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. · F-0657
Jun 1, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · F-0758
Apr 17, 2023
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Apr 17, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Apr 17, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0657
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (5 → 2).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2024
All citations:
8
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2026
All citations:
2
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
3
1
J ▲
2024
8
0
F
2026
2
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.
0 fines totaling $0, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Jun 1, 2024
Payment Denial
18 days from Sep 1, 2024
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityOklahoma averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
Not reported
Oklahoma average:
4.58
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
Not reported
Oklahoma average:
0.41
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
Not reported
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)
—
4.58
3.95
—
Registered Nurse hours
—
0.41
0.69
—
Weekend total nurse staffing
—
4.16
3.50
—
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
—
0.28
0.48
—
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
—
55.5
45.8
—
RN turnover (%)
—
53.6
42.9
—
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 —, RN —, weekend —.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (— here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Colonial Manor II. 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.