How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Shawn Manor Nursing Home
2024 Turner Road, Ponca City, OK 74604 (opens Google Maps) · Kay County · (580) 765-3364· 96 certified beds · avg 54 residents/day · certified since Jan 16, 1995 · 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 →
Part of chain: CONHOLD (5 facilities, chain avg rating 4.0★)
5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Nov 20, 2024
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Sep 9, 2022
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.74
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★★★★5/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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, pattern · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0600
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.
▲ Actual harm, pattern · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0600
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 (H): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 24, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, pattern · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0607
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
▲ Actual harm, pattern · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0607
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Why it matters: Without working prevention policies, mistreatment is more likely to happen and less likely to be caught.
Severity (H): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 24, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, pattern · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0609
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.
▲ Actual harm, pattern · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0609
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.
Why it matters: When incidents aren't reported promptly, abusers may continue harming residents and outside authorities can't step in.
Severity (H): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 24, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, pattern · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0610
The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do.
▲ Actual harm, pattern · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0610
The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do.
Why it matters: When allegations aren't investigated, harm to residents can continue unchecked.
Severity (H): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 24, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 22 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. F-0641
The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. F-0801
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
View all 22 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 20, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Nov 20, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Nov 20, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 2, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility charged residents' personal funds for items or services that Medicare or Medicaid already pays for. Facilities may not bill residents for covered items. · F-0571 |
| Nov 2, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0688 |
| Nov 2, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | ▲ H · Actual harm, pattern | 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. · F-0600 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | ▲ H · Actual harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | ▲ H · Actual 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. · F-0609 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | ▲ H · Actual harm, pattern | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0578 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0757 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | 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 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. · F-0886 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | 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 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0773 |
| Sep 9, 2022 | 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. · F-0943 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (3 → 3).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 4
2023
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 3
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 16 | 4 | H ▲ |
| 2023 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | D |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityOklahoma averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.74
Oklahoma average: 4.58
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.27
Oklahoma average: 0.41
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.74
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) | 3.74 | 4.58 | 3.95 | bottom 10% in Oklahoma; bottom 49% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.27 | 0.41 | 0.69 | bottom 22% in Oklahoma; bottom 7% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.74 | 4.16 | 3.50 | bottom 24% in Oklahoma; top 32% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.15 | 0.28 | 0.48 | bottom 14% in Oklahoma; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 45.8 | 55.5 | 45.8 | top 24% in Oklahoma; bottom 48% in the U.S. |
| 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 3.02, RN 0.22, weekend 3.01.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.02 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Shawn Manor Nursing Home. 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 / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sullivan, James | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 09/27/2010 |
| Allred, Amy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2018 |
| Allred, Amy | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2018 |
| Conhold of Ponca LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/27/2010 |
All 4 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Conhold — 5 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- Cimarron Pointe Care Center — Mannford, OK · overall 5/5
- Rolling Hills Care Center — Catoosa, OK · overall 4/5
- Sand Springs Nursing and Rehabilitation — Sand Springs, OK · overall 2/5abuse
- Sequoyah Pointe Living Center — Owasso, OK · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Do you have a qualified dietician on staff, and how involved are they in each resident's nutrition plan?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can you give me a written list of exactly what residents are charged for beyond what Medicare or Medicaid covers?"
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?"
- "CMS reports 46% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bradbury Commons | 1.1 mi | Ponca City, OK | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 | |
| Ponca City Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 2.5 mi | Ponca City, OK | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Hillcrest Manor Nursing Center | 13.8 mi | Blackwell, OK | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 375194.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).