Hearth Record

Elara Caring V

A home health agency in Enid, Oklahoma 73703

2613 N Van Buren St., Ste 102, Enid, Oklahoma 73703. (580) 213-3333.

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 4 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Apr 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 Apr 23, 2025: a recertification inspection.

4 deficiencies cited in the last three years.

Source:

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

When those deficiencies happened

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

4 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.

Apr 23, 2025: recertification inspection4 deficiencies
  • Rn Performs Assessment

    The inspectors’ words, 188 words

    “RN performs assessment CFR(s): 484.55(a)(1) A registered nurse must conduct an initial assessment visit to determine the immediate care and support needs of the patient; and, for Medicare patients, to determine eligibility for the Medicare home health benefit, including homebound status. The initial assessment visit must be held either within 48 hours of referral, or within 48 hours of the patient’s return home, or on the physician or allowed practitioner - ordered start of care date. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure a SOC assessment was conducted within 48 hours of referral for one (Patient #12) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #12 A review of the clinical record showed the agency received referral information on 12/20/24 and the SOC assessment occurred on 12/24/24 (4 days later). Documentation showed no physician notification of a delay in SOC and no change in orders. On 04/23/24 at 2:15 p.m., Staff B stated the SOC assessment should have been conducted within 48 hours of referral and the physician should have been notified for orders of a different SOC date.”

    Rule G0514. Element-level.

  • Plan Of Care Must Include The Following

    The inspectors’ words, 258 words

    “Plan of care must include the following CFR(s): 484.60(a)(2)(i-xvi) The individualized plan of care must include the following: (i) All pertinent diagnoses; (ii) The patient’s mental, psychosocial, and cognitive status; (iii) The types of services, supplies, and equipment required; (iv) The frequency and duration of visits to be made; (v) Prognosis; (vi) Rehabilitation potential; (vii) Functional limitations; (viii) Activities permitted; (ix) Nutritional requirements; (x) All medications and treatments; (xi) Safety measures to protect against injury; (xii) A description of the patient’s risk for emergency department visits and hospital re-admission, and all necessary interventions to address the underlying risk factors. (xiii) Patient and caregiver education and training to facilitate timely discharge; (xiv) Patient-specific interventions and education; measurable outcomes and goals identified by the HHA and the patient; (xv) Information related to any advanced directives; and (xvi) Any additional items the HHA or physician or allowed practitioner may choose to include. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure individualized patient POC included a SN intervention goal for one (Patient #9) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #9 A review of the POC dated 02/12/25 to 04/12/25 showed orders for SN to monitor the patient’s weight via virtual video monitoring daily for two times a week for one week, effective 04/06/25. Documentation showed no weight monitoring SN intervention goals. Documentation showed no physician notifications and no change in orders. On 04/23/25 at 1:52 p.m., Staff B stated the POC documentation should have included a SN intervention goal for the patient.”

    Rule G0574. Element-level.

  • Communication With All Physicians

    The inspectors’ words, 913 words

    “Communication with all physicians CFR(s): 484.60(d)(1) Standard: Coordination of Care. The HHA must: (1) Assure communication with all physicians or allowed practitioners involved in the plan of care. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure care was coordinated between the agency and physician for five (Patients #4, 5, 10, 11 and #12) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #4 A review of the POC dated 03/07/25 to 05/05/25 showed a diagnosis of polyarthritis. Documentation showed SN to assess, monitor and teach blood glucose management and report to the physician blood glucose levels less than 70 or greater than 265 every visit. A SN visit dated 03/20/25 stated the patient had no glucometer to monitor blood glucose levels and patient fell out of bed hitting her head. Documentation showed the SN note was auto faxed to the physician by the EMR system on 03/21/25. SN visits dated 03/27/25 stated the patient had no glucometer to monitor blood glucose levels and went to an emergency department for medical evaluation twice during the week between SN visits. Documentation showed the SN note was not auto faxed to the physician by the EMR system, no follow up physician communications, no coordination of care notes regarding the patient having no glucometer to monitor blood glucose levels, falling out of bed hitting her head, or visiting the emergency department twice during the week. On 04/23/25 at 1:20 p.m., Staff B stated the SN should have communicated the patient had no glucometer to monitor blood glucose levels, fell out of bed hitting her head and had gone to the emergency department for medical evaluation twice during the week between SN visits. Patient #5 A review of the POC dated 03/06/25 to 05/04/25 showed a diagnosis of hypertension. Documentation showed orders for SN to assess, monitor and teach blood glucose management and report to the physician blood glucose levels less than 70 or greater than 265 every visit. SN visits dated 03/11/25 and 03/18/25 stated the patient would not monitor blood glucose levels outside of the SN visits. Documentation showed the SN notes were not auto faxed to the physician by the EMR system and showed no follow up physician communications or coordination of care notes regarding the patient not monitoring blood glucose levels. On 04/23/25 at 1:30 p.m., Staff B stated the SN should have communicated the patient was refusing to monitor blood glucose levels. Patient #10 A review of the POC dated 12/01/24 to 01/29/25 showed a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. The POC showed orders for SN to assess, monitor, teach weight and blood pressure management and report to the physician weight reporting parameters of less than 145 pounds and greater than 150 pounds and blood pressure less than 80/50 and greater than 180/100. A SN visits dated 01/23/25 showed a reading of 142 with no notification to the physician. A SN visit dated 01/27/25 (to discharge from agency services) showed a blood pressure reading of 146/103. Documentation showed the blood pressure reading of 146/103 was auto faxed to the physician by the EMR system on 01/27/25 (day of agency discharge). Documentation showed no follow up physician communications or coordination of care notes regarding weight loss and elevated blood pressure reading. On 04/23/25 at 1:57 p.m., Staff B stated the SN should have communicated the patient’s weight loss and elevated blood pressure prior to discharge from agency services with the physician. Patient #11 A review of the POC dated 01/14/25 to 03/14/25 showed a diagnosis of after care for joint replacement. A SN visit dated 02/12/25 showed the patient complained of diarrhea, vomiting and weakness. Documentation showed no physician notification. During a SN visit dated 02/25/25, documentation showed the patient stated he was unable to drink fluids and continued to complain of vomiting and weakness. Documentation showed no physician notification, no coordination of care notes regarding the complaints of vomiting and weakness, and no changes in orders. Clinical documentation showed the patient was admitted to inpatient hospital services on 02/26/25. On 04/23/25 at 2:05 p.m., Staff B stated the SN should have communicated the patient’s continued complaints of diarrhea, vomiting and weaknesses with the physician. Patient #12 A review of the POC dated 12/24/24 to 02/21/25 showed a diagnosis of Diabetes mellitus Type II with a foot ulcer. Documentation showed orders for SN to assess, monitor and teach blood glucose management and report to the physician blood glucose levels less than 70 or greater than 300 every visit. A SN visit dated 12/26/24 showed a glucose level of 420 and verification the SN note was auto faxed to the physician by the EMR system on 12/27/24. A SN visit dated 12/28/24 showed a glucose level of 377 and verification he SN note was auto faxed to the physician by the EMR system on 12/31/24. A SN visit dated 01/24/25 showed a glucose level of 379 and the patient was out of insulin (diabetic medication). Documentation showed no physician notification by the SN or by auto faxed to the physician from the EMR system. Clinical documentation showed the patient was admitted to inpatient hospital services on 01/28/25 for cellulitis and wound infection with no follow up physician communications or coordination of care notes regarding patient’s elevated blood glucose level and lack of insulin. On 04/23/25 at 2:15 p.m., Staff B stated the SN should have communicated the elevated blood glucose levels and reported the patient was out of insulin.”

    Rule G0602. Element-level.

  • Discharge And Transfer Summaries

    The inspectors’ words, 359 words

    “Discharge and transfer summaries CFR(s): 484.110(a)(6)(i-iii) (i) A completed discharge summary that is sent to the primary care practitioner or other health care professional who will be responsible for providing care and services to the patient after discharge from the HHA (if any) within 5 business days of the patient’s discharge; or (ii) A completed transfer summary that is sent within 2 business days of a planned transfer, if the patient’s care will be immediately continued in a health care facility; or (iii) A completed transfer summary that is sent within 2 business days of becoming aware of an unplanned transfer, if the patient is still receiving care in a health care facility at the time when the HHA becomes aware of the transfer. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record reviews and interviews, the agency failed to ensure transfer/discharge summaries were provided to receiving service providers within two days of notification of transfer/discharge for three (Patients #10, 12 and #14) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #10 A review of the clinical record showed discharge from the agency on 01/27/25 to hospice provider services. Documentation showed no transfer summary was provided to the receiving hospice service provider. On 04/23/25 at 1:52 p.m., Staff B stated no discharge summary was sent to the receiving hospice service. Patient #12 A review of the clinical record showed transfer from the agency on 01/28/25 to inpatient hospital provider services. Documentation showed a transfer summary was provided to the receiving inpatient hospital service provider on 02/04/25 (6 days from the patient transfer). On 04/23/25 at 2:15 p.m., Staff B stated the transfer summary was sent to the receiving provider six days after the patient transferred to inpatient hospital service provider. Patient #14 A review of the clinical record showed transfer from the agency on 01/28/25 to inpatient hospital provider services. Documentation showed a transfer summary was provided to the receiving inpatient hospital service provider on 02/07/25 (9 days from the patient transfer). On 04/23/25 at 2:25 p.m., Staff B stated the transfer summary was sent to the receiving provider nine days after the patient transferred to inpatient hospital service provider.”

    Rule G1022. Element-level.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Apr 23, 2025Recertification inspection4 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified home health agency since Dec 15, 2007.
  • 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, speech pathology and home health aide services.
  • Doesn’t offer medical social 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?

  • Alliance Health Inc. owns 100% directly since Sep 1, 2017.
  • 17 owners or officers are people: Daniel R Manley (corporate officer); Ananth P Mohan (corporate officer); Ananth P Mohan (corporate director); Scott A Powers (corporate officer); Scott A Powers (corporate director); Christina M Blasi (corporate director); John Mcmahon (corporate officer); Katie L Monastiere (managing employee (on the payroll)); Elizabeth S Swanson (managing employee (on the payroll)); Lori Clark (runs it (operational or managerial control)); Hugh B Mcbride (corporate director); Henry Mannix (corporate director); Mark Pacala (corporate director); Melisa Bunner (runs it (operational or managerial control)); Adam M Blumenthal (corporate director); Jeremy Michael Kogler (corporate director); Church M Moore (corporate director).
  • 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
Airjaguar Holdco, Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%May 15, 2018
Airjaguar Acquisition, LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%May 15, 2018
HCI Holdings CorporationOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Sep 1, 2017
Healthcare Innovations Private Services Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Sep 1, 2017
Bw Homecare Holdings LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%May 15, 2018
Hci Parent Holdings Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Sep 1, 2017
Elara Holdings, L.L.C.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Dec 30, 2019
Jhh/Cima Holdings Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Sep 1, 2017
Bw Nhhc Holdco, LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%May 15, 2018
Alliance Health Inc.Owns 5% or more directly100%Sep 1, 2017
Bw Nhhc Co-Invest, L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies42.85%Jul 1, 2023
Kia Ix (Hh) Investor, L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies40.27%Jul 1, 2023
Kelso Hh Co-Investment, L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies19.2%Dec 30, 2019
Kelso Investment Associates Ix, L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies15.68%Dec 30, 2019
Blue WOLF Capital Fund III L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies11.13%Jul 1, 2023
Bw III Homecare Holdings, LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies11.13%Jul 1, 2023
Stepstone H Opportunities Fund, L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies8.78%Dec 30, 2019
Stepstone K Strategic Opportunities Fund II L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies5.48%Dec 30, 2019
Ironsides Direct Investment Fund IV, L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies4.94%Dec 30, 2019
Uss-Constitution Co-Investment Fund II, L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies4.94%Dec 30, 2019
Kep VI LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies4.52%Dec 30, 2019

How do patients fare?

  • CMS rates its quality of patient care 4 of 5.
  • Patients rate it 4 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (112 surveys completed): 84% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 82% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS compares it with the national rate: discharged to the community, better; 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 stars4 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the agency’s patients, 1 to 54 of 5
Discharged to the communityCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate89.37% (better than the national rate)
Potentially preventable hospital staysCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate11.47% (same as the national rate)
Potentially preventable readmissions after dischargeCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate3.90% (same as the national rate)

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 18 agencies CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 73703, 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 4 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.