Hearth Record

Carter Healthcare of Oklahoma, LLC

A home health agency in Vinita, Oklahoma 74301

702 N. Wilson, Vinita, Oklahoma 74301. (918) 791-6172.

CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.

The short answer

Record last released by CMS on Oct 21, 2026.

The last 24 months 3 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Dec 2025. Most serious: Element-level. Every month

Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.

What these words mean3
Star ratings
CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
Inspection (survey)
A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
Deficiency, citation, violation
What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.

What did inspectors find?

The last inspection on record was on Dec 10, 2025: a recertification inspection.

3 deficiencies cited in the last three years.

Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

When those deficiencies happened

3 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Dec 2025. Most serious: Element-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 24, 2026.

3 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 NovDec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOct

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.

Each deficiency, as cited

Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.

Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Dec 10, 2025: recertification inspection3 deficiencies
  • 5 Calendar Days After Start Of Care

    The inspectors’ words, 529 words

    “5 calendar days after start of care CFR(s): 484.55(b)(1) The comprehensive assessment must be completed in a timely manner, consistent with the patient’s immediate needs, but no later than 5 calendar days after the start of care. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, PT staff failed to conduct initial evaluations timely as part of the comprehensive assessment for four (#2, #3, #4 and #7) of seven (#1-#7) records reviewed. Patient #2 Review of Patient #2 record for SOC certification period 10/30/25 to 12/283/25 revealed a primary diagnosis of Pneumonia and referral for SN and PT services. Further review revealed a SOC OASIS was completed by the SN on 10/30/25 and a PT initial evaluation was completed on 11/8/25 (9 days later). A communication note titled “Provider Notification” dated 10/31/25 documented, “PT eval will not be performed within 48 hrs. of referral. PT eval has been scheduled for the week of 11/03/25”. The record failed to provide the reason the initial PT evaluation was not completed within 5 days of the SOC as part of the comprehensive assessment. Patient #3 Review of Patient #3 record for SOC certification period 10/08/25 to 12/06/25 revealed a primary diagnosis of Type II Diabetes Mellitus with Foot Ulcer and referral for SN and PT services. Further review revealed a SOC OASIS was completed by the SN on 10/08/25 and a PT initial evaluation was completed on 10/20/25 (12 days later). A Provider Notification dated 10/14/25 documented, “PT eval will not be performed within 48 hrs. of referral. PT eval has been scheduled for the week of 10/20/25”. The record failed to provide the reason the initial PT evaluation was not completed within 5 days of the SOC as part of the comprehensive assessment. Patient #4 Review of Patient #4 record for SOC certification period 11/14/25 to 01/12/26 revealed a primary diagnosis of Malignant Neoplasm of Rectum and referral for SN and PT services. Further review revealed a SOC OASIS was completed by the SN on 11/14/25 and a PT initial evaluation was completed on 11/20/25 (6 days later). A Provider Notification dated 11/17/25 documented, “PT eval will not be performed within 48 hrs. of referral. PT eval has been scheduled for the week of 11/17/25”. The record failed to provide the reason the initial PT evaluation was not completed within 5 days of the SOC as part of the comprehensive assessment. Patient #7 Review of Patient #7 record for SOC certification period 09/30/25 to 11/28/25 revealed a primary diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Failure and referral for SN and PT services. Further review revealed a SOC OASIS was completed by the SN on 09/30/25 and a PT initial evaluation was completed on 10/17/25 (17 days later). The SOC assessment indicated multiple falls and that Pt #7 would benefit from PT. The record failed to provide the reason the initial PT evaluation was not completed within 5 days of the SOC as part of the comprehensive assessment. During an interview on 12/10/25 at 2:15 PM, RN1 stated the PT initial evaluations were not completed timely as part of the comprehensive assessment for Patient #2, #3, #4 and #7.”

    Rule G0520. Element-level.

  • Promptly Alert Relevant Physician Of Changes

    The inspectors’ words, 218 words

    “Promptly alert relevant physician of changes CFR(s): 484.60(c)(1) The HHA must promptly alert the relevant physician(s) or allowed practitioner(s) to any changes in the patient’s condition or needs that suggest that outcomes are not being achieved and/or that the plan of care should be altered. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, SN staff failed to promptly notify the physician of a patient fall with injuries and increased pain for one (#5) of seven (#1-#7) records reviewed. Patient #5 Review of Patient #5 record for certification period 10/18/25 to 12/16/252 revealed a primary diagnosis of Type II Diabetes Mellitus with Chronic Kidney Disease with orders for SN visits 1 time a week for 9 weeks. Further review revealed a SN Visit Note on 12/02/25 documented Patient #5 had a fall and skin tear on right forearm, bruising on ribs and complained of shoulder, hip and back pain of “10”. A picture of the right forearm skin tear was identified but no documentation provided evidence the physician was notified of the fall with injuries or the pain level of “10”. During an interview on 12/10/25 at 2:15 PM, RN1 stated there was no evidence the SN notified the physician of the patients fall, injuries or reported pain level of “10” as required.”

    Rule G0590. Element-level.

  • Provide Services In The Plan Of Care

    The inspectors’ words, 433 words

    “Provide services in the plan of care CFR(s): 484.75(b)(3) Providing services that are ordered by the physician or allowed practitioner as indicated in the plan of care; This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review, observations and interview, SN staff failed to provide services and interventions as ordered in the POC for three (#2, #3 and #6) of seven (#1-#7) records reviewed. Patient #2 Review of Patient #2 record for SOC certification period 10/30/25 to 12/28/25 revealed a primary diagnosis of Pneumonia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Dependance on Supplemental Oxygen. The POC contained orders for SN visits 1 time a week for 7 weeks and for the “SN to educate on use of oxygen sign to help first responders and provide sign and secure to exterior door as needed”. During a home visit conducted on 12/10/25 at 10:00 AM, a portable oxygen tank and concentrator were visible in the living room but no “Oxygen Sign” was observed on the exterior or interior of the home. When this Surveyor asked the CG if an Oxygen Sign was posted in the home, the CG stated, “No”. The SN retrieved an Oxygen Sign from the patient’s Admission packet and provided to the CG to post in the home. Patient #3 Review of Patient #3 record for SOC certification period 10/08/25 to 12/06/25 revealed a primary diagnosis of Type II Diabetes Mellitus with Foot Ulcer. The POC contained orders for SN visits 2 times a week for 9 weeks and PT visits 2 times a week for 4 weeks and 1 time a week for 3 weeks. Further record review failed to provide evidence a SN visit or PT visit was conducted the week of 10/12/25. There was no documentation the physician was notified of a Missed Visit, or the reason visits were not conducted as ordered. Patient #6 Review of Patient #6 record for SOC certification period 08/13/25 to 10/11/25 revealed a primary diagnosis of Hypertensive Heart Failure and Type II Diabetes Mellitus. The POC contained orders for SN visits 1 time a week for 9 weeks, orders for the “SN to assess patient’s weight log every visit” and parameters to notify the physician for “Fasting Blood Sugar >300 or 350 or <60”. Further record review failed to provide evidence the SN assessed weights for visits conducted from 09/09/25,09/19/25 or 10/06/25 and no blood sugar results were documented for SN visits 08/13/25 or 10/06/25. During an interview on 12/10/25 at 2:15 PM, RN1 stated the SN failed to provide interventions as ordered on the POC for Patient #2, #3 and #6.”

    Rule G0710. Element-level.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Dec 10, 2025Recertification inspection3 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified home health agency since Aug 10, 2005.
  • Ownership: proprietary (for profit).
  • No deficiency on record in the last three years.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Has anything been proven against it?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for home health agencies, so none are shown.
  • 0 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Who does the caring?

  • Offers nursing care, physical therapy, occupational therapy and speech pathology.
  • Doesn’t offer medical social services and home health aide services.
  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for home health agencies.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who owns it?

  • Oklahoma Homecare, LLC owns 100% directly since Feb 28, 2015.
  • 5 owners or officers are people: Justin Carter (owns 5% or more through other companies, 90.29%); Justin Carter (corporate officer, 90.29%); Robert L Peters (runs it (operational or managerial control), 33%); Cynthia Carter (owns 5% or more through other companies, 9.71%); Cynthia Carter (managing employee (on the payroll), 9.71%).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Agency All Owners and Home Health Agency Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Oklahoma Homecare, LLCOwns 5% or more directly100%Feb 28, 2015

How do patients fare?

  • CMS rates its quality of patient care 3.5 of 5.
  • Patients rate it 5 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (49 surveys completed): 95% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 72% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS compares it with the national rate: discharged to the community, worse; potentially preventable hospital stays, the same; potentially preventable readmissions after discharge, the same.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies and Home Health Patient Survey. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Quality of patient care ratingCMS star rating, 1 to 5 in half stars3.5 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the agency’s patients, 1 to 55 of 5
Discharged to the communityCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate66.45% (worse than the national rate)
Potentially preventable hospital staysCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate12.47% (same as the national rate)
Potentially preventable readmissions after dischargeCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate4.12% (same as the national rate)

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 17 agencies CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 74301, where this agency’s office is, 17 have a quality of patient care rating; the middle one is 3.5 of 5, and this one is rated 3.5 of 5.
Source:

CMS, Home Health ZIP Codes and Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for home health agencies, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • QCOR says some of its home health reports are accurate or available only through May 19, 2021, because of a systems migration.
  • Many home health agencies are inspected by a private accrediting organisation instead of the state, and QCOR’s home health file doesn’t appear to include those inspections: no inspection on record here doesn’t mean none took place.

Sources

If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Oct 24, 2026.

From the agency

The public record above comes first. Anything the agency adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the agency will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.

Paid listing

None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the agency”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 28, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.