Glenhaven Retirement Village
3003 Iowa, Chickasha, OK 73023 · Grady County · 120 certified beds · avg 71 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1999
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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, one-off · Oct 8, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
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 (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.
Corrected: Nov 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 8, 2022 · F-0686
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.
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 3, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (29)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 16, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Oct 8, 2024 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2023 | 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. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | 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. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | 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. |
| Dec 8, 2022 | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 1).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 14 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2023 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 2 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2025 | 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)
1 fine totaling $14,433, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 5, 2024 | Fine | $14,433 |
| Sep 5, 2024 | Payment Denial | 3 days from Nov 12, 2024 |
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) | 5.70 | 4.58 | 3.95 | top 9% in Oklahoma; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.14 | 0.41 | 0.69 | bottom 2% in Oklahoma; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.05 | 4.16 | 3.50 | top 12% in Oklahoma; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.14 | 0.28 | 0.48 | bottom 9% in Oklahoma; bottom 4% 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 4.64, RN 0.12, weekend 4.11. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hamilton, Glenda | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 07/09/2004 |
| Lance, Billy | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 07/09/2004 |
| Mason, Michael | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 05/01/2005 |
| Mason, Patrick | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 07/09/2004 |
| Trett, Jenny | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 07/09/2004 |
| Hamilton, Glenda | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/25/2005 |
| Hamilton, Glenda | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/09/2004 |
| Lance, Billy | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/25/2005 |
| Mason, Michael | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/25/2005 |
| Mason, Patrick | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/25/2005 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "How is pest control handled here, and when was the last treatment or inspection?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "How do your actual daily staffing levels compare to what's reported on Medicare's Care Compare website?"
- "How soon after admission is a full assessment completed, and how are the findings shared with the family?"
- "How do you track that every resident's quarterly assessment happens on time?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cottonwood Creek Skilled Nursing & Therapy | 0.0 mi | Chickasha, OK | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Shanoan Springs Nursing and Rehabilitation | 1.7 mi | Chickasha, OK | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Chickasha Nursing Center, INC | 2.0 mi | Chickasha, OK | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Anadarko Nursing & Rehab | 16.1 mi | Anadarko, OK | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Senior Village Healthcare | 18.4 mi | Blanchard, OK | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Tuttle Care Center | 18.9 mi | Tuttle, OK | ★★☆☆☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 375359.