Chisholm Trail Assisted Living

What the state also noted

• — The December 5, 2025 letter states that 'a revisit was conducted' and that the deficiencies were corrected effective 12/01/2025. The letter does not say whether the revisit was on site or an offsite paper review, so no on-site verification should be claimed.
• — The facility's first plan of correction was rejected by the state because the proposed correction date of December 31, 2025 fell outside the required 60-day window; a revised plan was then accepted on 11/12/2025.
• — The facility's own correction evidence is internally inconsistent: the plan of correction and the in-service handout are dated 10/15/2025, but the attached in-service attendance sheet is dated 08/15/2025 - roughly two months before the survey. The attendance names and times are blank or unreadable in the scan.
• — This survey was not deficiency-free. Two citations were issued on 10/08/2025. The first, under the admission assessment rule and isolated to one or a few residents, was for an admission assessment not signed or coordinated by an RN or physician for one resident and a missing admission assessment for another (2 of 10 reviewed). The second, under the annual assessment rule and a pattern affecting several residents, was for annual comprehensive assessments that were late or not completed for 2 of 10 sampled residents. Assessments drive the care plan, so these are not trivial paperwork items even though no resident harm was described.
• — Only one survey (10/08/2025) falls within the 24-month window, so no trend over time can be shown.
• — The resident with no locatable admission assessment (Resident #6) was admitted 08/20/25 with a nondisplaced fracture of the right femur, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis and a history of falls - a high fall-risk profile admitted without a documented assessment on file.
• — The survey packet contains two forms with conflicting summary lines - one stating 'No deficiencies were cited' and another stating 'Deficiencies were cited as a result of the survey.' Because the accompanying State Form lists two citations and the enforcement letters confirm deficiencies were identified, this was counted as a cited survey, not a clean one.
• — The complaint investigation reports do not state in words whether each allegation was substantiated. The count of zero substantiated complaints is based on the fact that neither citation relates to abuse, medication administration, self-determination, or pest control.
• — One page at the end of this bundle belongs to a different facility (AL1412, Village on the Park - Oklahoma City) and was excluded from this review.