Oklahoma ›Fairfax

Fairfax Behavioral Health & Memory Care Community

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

282 County Road 6300, Fairfax, OK 74637 (opens Google Maps) · Osage County · (918) 642-3234· 60 certified beds · avg 49 residents/day · certified since Jun 28, 2004 · 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 →

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

What the abuse flag means →

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)
inspected Jul 21, 2025
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Feb 5, 2026
$46,436
Fines, last 3 years
4.52
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: 1/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 5, 2026 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

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 (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. 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: Feb 10, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 21, 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): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. 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: Sep 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 36 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint F-0684

  2. G · Actual harm, isolated

    The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint F-0684

  3. 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. · from a complaint F-0657

View all 36 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
May 6, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Feb 5, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Feb 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 21, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Jul 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0803
Jul 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Jul 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Jul 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · F-0605
Jul 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 16, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Oct 16, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 7, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0550
Jun 7, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Jun 7, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 7, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0700
Jun 7, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jun 7, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Jun 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623
Jun 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. · F-0636
Jun 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · F-0637
Jun 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867
Jun 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0919
May 11, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
May 11, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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 11, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
May 11, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 11, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 11, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759
May 11, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 11, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851
May 11, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (11 → 9).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 1

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202390F
2024140E
202591G ▲
202641G ▲

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

2 fines totaling $46,436.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Feb 5, 2026Fine$4,186
Jul 21, 2025Fine$42,250

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

What these staffing numbers mean →

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: 4.52
Oklahoma average: 4.58
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.30
Oklahoma average: 0.41
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.56
Oklahoma average: 4.16
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityOklahoma avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.524.583.95bottom 49% in Oklahoma; top 22% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.300.410.69bottom 32% in Oklahoma; bottom 9% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.564.163.50bottom 18% in Oklahoma; top 39% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.230.280.48bottom 41% in Oklahoma; bottom 17% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)—55.545.8—
RN turnover (%)—53.642.9—

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 3.24, RN 0.21, weekend 2.55.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.24 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Fairfax Behavioral Health & Memory Care Community. 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 - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Fairfax Behavioral Health and Memory Care Community LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—11/01/2023
Richmond, JenniferIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—11/01/2023
Fairfax Behavioral Health and Memory Care Community LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2023
Fairfax Behavioral Health and Memory Care Community LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2023
Finch, CoreyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2026
Finch, CoreyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2026
Forvis Mazars LLPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/03/2023
Richmond, JenniferIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2023
Richmond, JenniferIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2023
Richmond, JenniferIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2023
Richmond45 LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2023
Richmond45 LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2023
Todd, MichaelIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE04/06/2026
Todd, MichaelIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/06/2026
Todd, MichaelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/06/2026

All 15 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Who reviews your menus, and can I see this week's menu and join my family member for a meal?"
  • "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Oklahoma midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 15 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Southern Oaks Care Center17.0 miPawnee, OK★★★★☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 1 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Osage, OK — 3 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Fairfax →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 375467.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details