Fairfax Behavioral Health & Memory Care Community
282 County Road 6300, Fairfax, OK 74637 · Osage County · 60 certified beds · avg 49 residents/day · certified since Jun 28, 2004
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.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5
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)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Feb 10, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Sep 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (36)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| May 6, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Feb 5, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Feb 5, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Feb 5, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Jul 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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 |
| Jul 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Jul 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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 21, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jul 21, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 21, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 21, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 16, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint |
| Oct 16, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Aug 6, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jun 7, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Jun 7, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| May 11, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| May 11, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| May 11, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| May 11, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 11, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 11, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| May 11, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 11, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. |
| May 11, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (11 → 9).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 9 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 14 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 9 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 4 | 1 | G ▲ |
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 $46,436.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 5, 2026 | Fine | $4,186 |
| Jul 21, 2025 | Fine | $42,250 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Oklahoma avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.52 | 4.58 | 3.95 | bottom 49% in Oklahoma; top 22% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.30 | 0.41 | 0.69 | bottom 32% in Oklahoma; bottom 9% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.56 | 4.16 | 3.50 | bottom 18% in Oklahoma; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.23 | 0.28 | 0.48 | bottom 41% in Oklahoma; bottom 17% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 0.0 | 55.5 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | 0.0 | 53.6 | 42.9 | — |
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 3.24, RN 0.21, weekend 2.55. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fairfax Behavioral Health and Memory Care Community LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 11/01/2023 |
| Richmond, Jennifer | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 11/01/2023 |
| Fairfax Behavioral Health and Memory Care Community LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2023 |
| Fairfax Behavioral Health and Memory Care Community LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2023 |
| Finch, Corey | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2026 |
| Finch, Corey | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2026 |
| Forvis Mazars LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/03/2023 |
| Richmond, Jennifer | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2023 |
| Richmond, Jennifer | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2023 |
| Richmond, Jennifer | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2023 |
| Richmond45 LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2023 |
| Richmond45 LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2023 |
| Todd, Michael | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/06/2026 |
| Todd, Michael | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/06/2026 |
| Todd, Michael | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/06/2026 |
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 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?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Southern Oaks Care Center | 17.0 mi | Pawnee, OK | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 1 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 375467.