OklahomaTecumseh

Heritage Skilled Nursing and Therapy

201 West Walnut, Tecumseh, OK 74873 · Pottawatomie County · 100 certified beds · avg 64 residents/day · certified since Oct 9, 2003

Part of chain: BRIDGES HEALTH (33 facilities, chain avg rating 3.6★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.40
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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.

All citations in the current public record (27)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Mar 27, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 27, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 16, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Nov 16, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts.
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or obtain laboratory tests when a doctor ordered them, or did not promptly report the results back to the doctor who ordered them.
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 17, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 17, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 17, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason.
Nov 17, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 17, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 17, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Nov 17, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
Nov 17, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Nov 17, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Nov 17, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Nov 17, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022110E
2023100E
202560E

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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

MeasureThis facilityOklahoma avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.404.583.95bottom 42% in Oklahoma; top 26% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.340.410.69bottom 41% in Oklahoma; bottom 14% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.054.163.50bottom 46% in Oklahoma; top 21% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.260.280.48top 46% in Oklahoma; bottom 24% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)60.055.545.8bottom 35% in Oklahoma; bottom 17% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)60.053.642.9bottom 43% in Oklahoma; bottom 22% in the U.S.

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 3.57, RN 0.28, weekend 3.28. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Bridges Employee Stock Ownership TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest100%12/31/2020
Bridges Esop, INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/31/2020
Coble, WilliamIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE12/31/2020
Coble, WilliamIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/31/2020
Deroin, KristyIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE06/30/2019

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
The Golden Rule Home3.5 miShawnee, OK★★☆☆☆2/5
The Regency Skilled Nursing and Therapy6.5 miShawnee, OK★★★★★5/5
Shawnee Colonial Estates Nursing Home6.5 miShawnee, OK★☆☆☆☆1/5
Shawnee Care Center7.1 miShawnee, OK★☆☆☆☆2/5
Seminole Pioneer Nursing Home13.9 miSeminole, OK★☆☆☆☆2/5
Seminole Care and Rehabilitation Center14.4 miSeminole, OK★★★★☆3/5
McLoud Nursing Center14.5 miMcLoud, OK★★☆☆☆2/5
Meeker Nursing Center17.2 miMeeker, OK★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Tecumseh →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 375446.