Hearth Record

Trinity Hospice

A hospice in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73116

201 NW 63rd St, Ste 230, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73116. (405) 594-9990.

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 23, 2026.

The last 24 months 14 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Aug 2024. Most serious: Standard-level. Every month

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

What these words mean2
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?

14 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 29 hospices serving ZIP code 73116 had 6.5.

The last inspection on record was on Aug 21, 2024: a recertification inspection by the state.

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

When those deficiencies happened

14 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Aug 2024. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

14 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 hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Aug 21, 2024: recertification inspection by the state14 deficiencies
  • Local, State, Tribal Collaboration Process (42 CFR 418.113(a)(4))

    The inspectors’ words, 98 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure contact information for an integrated emergency preparedness response with Federal, State, Tribal, Regional and Local emergency management officials for all patients and employees. Findings: A review of administrative records showed no contact information for an integrated emergency preparedness response with Federal, State, Tribal, Regional and Local emergency management officials for the agency. On 08/20/24 at 2:00 p.m., Staff A stated the hospices Emergency Preparedness Plan did not include resource contact information for an integrated emergency preparedness response with Federal, State, Tribal, Regional and Local emergency management officials.”

    Rule E0009. Standard-level.

  • EP Testing Requirements (42 CFR 418.113(d)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 117 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure emergency preparedness disaster declaration, table-top exercises, drills, community drills or plan activation events were conducted for 05/01/2022 to 12/31/22, calendar year 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/19/24 for all patients, volunteers, and employees. Findings: A review of administrative records related to emergency preparedness showed no documentation of emergency preparedness disaster declaration, table-top exercises, drills, community drills or plan activation events for 05/01/2022 to 12/31/22, calendar year 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/19/24. On 08/20/24 at 2:00 p.m., Staff A stated the hospice had no emergency preparedness disaster declaration, table-top exercises, drills, community drills or plan activation events for 05/01/2022 to 12/31/22, calendar year 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/19/24.”

    Rule E0039. Standard-level.

  • Timeframe for completion of assessment (42 CFR 418.54(b))

    The inspectors’ words, 239 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure: 1. Initial spiritual assessments were conducted by the Chaplain within the five-day timeframe required to complete the initial comprehensive assessment for two (Patients #5 and #7) of 14 patients. 2. Initial psychosocial assessments were conducted by the MSW within the five-day timeframe required to complete the initial comprehensive assessment for one (Patients #5) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #5 A review of the clinical record showed an election of the hospice benefit/SOC on 05/16/24. Documentation showed a spiritual assessment was conducted on 05/22/21 (6 days from the date of election) and a psychosocial assessment was conducted on 05/24/21 (8 days from the date of election). Documentation showed no declined chaplain or MSW visits and no changes in orders. On 08/21/24 at 9:38 a.m., Staff A stated the Chaplain and MSW had not conducted the initial spiritual and psychosocial assessments for patient #5 within the five-day timeframe required to complete the initial comprehensive assessment. Patient #7 A review of the clinical record showed an election of the hospice benefit/SOC on 06/11/24. Documentation showed a spiritual assessment was conducted on 06/17/24 (6 days from the date of election). Documentation showed no declined chaplain visits and no changes in orders. On 08/21/24 at 9:42 a.m., Staff A stated the Chaplain had not conducted the initial spiritual assessment for patient #7 within the five-day timeframe required to complete the initial comprehensive assessment.”

    Rule L0523. Standard-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(7))

    The inspectors’ words, 591 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure development of a bereavement POC for 11 (Patients #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #1 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 08/09/24 with no IDG update. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #2 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 08/09/24 with no IDG update. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #3 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 04/02/24 with later IDG updates on 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #4 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 06/21/24 with later IDG updates on 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #5 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 05/22/24 with IDG updates on 05/29/24, 06/13/24, 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #6 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 06/07/24 with later IDG updates on 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #7 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 06/17/24 with later IDG updates on 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #8 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 06/21/24 with later IDG updates on 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #9 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 03/01/24 with later IDG updates on 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #10 A review of the clinical record showed an initial bereavement assessment dated 07/31/24 with IDG updates on 08/07/24. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. Patient #11 A review of the clinical record showed a SOC on 05/23/24 and an initial bereavement assessment dated 06/27/24 with IDG updates on 05/24/24, 06/10/24, 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24. Documentation showed no bereavement POC. Documentation showed no patient or caregiver refusal of a bereavement POC and showed no change in orders. On 08/21/24 at 9:27 a.m. to 9:55 a.m., Staff A stated patients #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 had no bereavement POCs. On 08/21/24 at 11:52 a.m., Staff H stated Bereavement POCs are developed and put into place after a patient passes away.”

    Rule L0531. Standard-level.

  • Plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(b))

    The inspectors’ words, 1,474 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure: 1. Aide visits were provided in accordance with the plan of care for eight (Patients #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8) of 14 patients; 2. SN visits were provided in accordance with the plan of care for seven (Patients #3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10) of 14 patients; 3. Social work services were provided in accordance with the plan of care for one (Patients #9) of 14 patients; 4. Chaplain services were provided in accordance with the plan of care for one (Patients #9) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #1 A review of a POC dated 08/07/24 to 11/05/24 with IDG updates on 08/08/24 showed documentation of an aide visit frequency of three times a week. Documentation showed during the weeks of: 08/07/24 to 08/10/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 08/11/24 to 08/17/24 (no aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered aide visit frequencies. On 08/21/24 at 9:27 a.m., Staff A stated aide visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #1. Patient #2 A review of a POC dated 08/07/24 to 11/05/24 with IDG updates on 08/08/24 showed documentation of an aide visit frequency of three times a week. Documentation showed during the weeks of: 08/07/24 to 08/10/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 08/11/24 to 08/17/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered aide visit frequencies. On 08/21/24 at 9:30 a.m., Staff A stated aide visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #2. Patient #3 A review of a POC dated 06/27/24 to 09/24/24 with IDG updates on 05/24/24, 06/10/24, 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24 showed documentation of an aide visit frequency of three times a week and SN visit frequency of two times a week. Documentation showed during the weeks of: 06/27/24 to 06/29/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered; ono SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered); 07/14/24 to 07/20/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered); 07/21/24 to 07/27/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered); 07/28/24 to 08/03/24 one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered); 08/04/24 to 08/10/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered aide or SN visit frequencies. On 08/21/24 at 9:35 a.m., Staff A stated aide and SN visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #3. Patient #4 A review of a POC dated 06/20/24 to 09/18/24 with IDG updates on 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24 showed documentation of an aide visit frequency of three times a week and SN visit frequency of two times a week. Documentation showed during the weeks of: 06/20/24 to 06/22/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 06/30/24 to 07/06/24 (one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered); 07/28/24 to 08/03/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 08/04/24 to 08/10/24 (one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered aide or SN visit frequencies. On 08/21/24 at 9:37 a.m., Staff A stated aide and SN visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #4. Patient #5 A review of a POC dated 05/16/24 to 08/14/24 with IDG updates on 05/24/24, 06/10/24, 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24 showed documentation of an aide visit frequency of three times a week and SN visit frequency of two times a week. Documentation showed during the weeks of: 05/16/24 to 05/18/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 05/19/24 to 05/25/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered); 06/09/24 to 06/15/24 (one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered); 06/16/24 to 06/22/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 06/30/24 to 07/06/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered; one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered); 07/07/24 to 07/13/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 08/04/24 to 08/10/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered; one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered); 08/11/24 to 08/17/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered aide or SN visit frequencies. On 08/21/24 at 9:38 a.m., Staff A stated aide and SN visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #5. Patient #6 A review of a POC dated 06/06/24 to 09/04/24 with IDG updates on 06/10/24, 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24 showed documentation of an aide visit frequency of three times a week and SN visit frequency of two times a week. Documentation showed during the weeks of: 06/06/24 to 06/08/24 (no aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 06/16/24 to 06/22/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 06/30/24 to 07/06/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered; one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered); 07/07/24 to 07/13/24 (one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered); 08/04/24 to 08/10/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 08/11/24 to 08/17/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered aide or SN visit frequencies. On 08/21/24 at 9:40 a.m., Staff A stated aide and SN visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #6. Patient #7 A review of a POC dated 06/11/24 to 09/09/24 with IDG updates on 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24 showed documentation of an aide visit frequency of three times a week and SN visit frequency of two times a week. Documentation showed during the weeks of: 06/11/24 to 06/16/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 07/07/24 to 07/13/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered); 07/21/24 to 07/27/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered; one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered aide or SN visit frequencies. On 08/21/24 at 9:42 a.m., Staff A stated aide and SN visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #7. Patient #8 A review of a POC dated 06/18/24 to 09/16/24 with IDG updates on 06/25/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and 08/07/24 showed documentation of an aide visit frequency of three times a week and SN visit frequency of two times a week. Documentation showed during the weeks of: 06/23/24 to 06/29/24 (one aide visit was conducted, three aide visits ordered); 06/30/24 to 07/06/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered; one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered); 07/07/24 to 07/13/24 (one aide visit was conducted, two aide visits ordered); 07/14/24 to 07/20/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered); 08/04/24 to 08/10/24 (two aide visits were conducted, three aide visits ordered); 08/11/24 to 08/17/24 (one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered aide or SN visit frequencies. On 08/21/24 at 9:44 a.m., Staff A stated aide and SN visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #8. Patient #9 A review of a POC dated 02/29/24 to 05/29/24 with IDG updates on 03/06/24, 03/20/24, 04/03/24, 04/17/24, 05/01/24, and 05/15/24 showed documentation of an MSW visit frequency of one time a month and Chaplain visit frequency of one time a month. Documentation showed during the months of April and May no MSW or Chaplain visits were conducted (two visits ordered, no visits scheduled and/or conducted). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered MSW or Chaplain visit frequencies. On 08/14/24 at 12:40 p.m., Staff B stated MSW and Chaplain visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #9. Patient #10 A review of the clinical record showed a SOC date of 07/24/24. Documentation showed no POC. An IDG update on 08/08/24 showed documentation of an SN visit frequency of two times a week. Documentation showed during the week of 08/04/24 to 08/10/24 (one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits were ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered SN visit frequency. On 08/21/24 at 9:52 a.m., Staff A stated SN visits were not provided in accordance with the POC for patient #10.”

    Rule L0543. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 111 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure the plans of care included a hospice diagnosis and a frequency and duration of visits for MSW and Chaplain services for one (Patient #8) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #8 A recertification plan of care dated 06/18/24 and IDG updates to the POC on 06/27/24, 07/10/24, 07/25/24 and on 08/08/24 documented no hospice diagnosis and no and a frequency and duration of visits for MSW and Chaplain services. On 08/21/24 at 9:44 a.m., Staff A stated the recertification POC had no hospice diagnosis and no and a frequency and duration of visits for MSW and Chaplain services for patient #8.”

    Rule L0546. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 282 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure the IDG: 1. Updated the plans of care the recertification periods for one (Patients #9) of 14 patients and; 2. Developed and initiated a POC after the SOC for one (Patient #10) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #9 A review of a POC dated 02/29/24 to 05/29/24 with IDG updates on 03/06/24, 03/20/24, 04/03/24, 04/17/24, 05/01/24, 05/15/24 and 05/29/24 showed no documentation of a POC for the subsequent recertification periods starting on 05/30/24. IDG updates dated 06/13/24, 06/25/24, 0710/24, 07/25/24 and on 08/07/24 showed no documentation of anticipated service scope and discipline frequencies for the recertification period of 05/30/24 to 07/29/24 and 07/30/24 to 09/28/24. Documentation showed no IDG communications, and no physician notifications related to recertification scope of hospice services and discipline frequencies prior to the end of the POC ending on 05/29/24. On 08/21/24 at 9:46 a.m., Staff A stated the recertification plans of care for patients #9 were not updated and implemented by the IDG prior to the beginning of the patients recertification periods after 05/29/24. Patient #10 A review of the clinical record showed a SOC date of 07/24/24. Documentation showed no POC. An IDG update on 08/08/24 showed documentation of an SN visit frequency of two times a week. Documentation showed during the week of 08/04/24 to 08/10/24 (one SN visit was conducted, two SN visits were ordered). Documentation showed no communications between the IDG and showed no changes in the ordered SN visit frequency. On 08/21/24 at 9:52 a.m., Staff A stated the plans of care for patients #10 was not completed and implemented by the IDG within five days of the SOC on 07/24/24.”

    Rule L0547. Standard-level.

  • Program scope (42 CFR 418.58(a)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 143 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure its QAPI Program showed measurable improvement in indicators related to improved palliative outcomes and hospice services for all patients, employees and volunteers. Findings: Administrative records related to the QAPI program for the hospice were requested. No administrative records related to the QAPI program were provided. On 08/20/24 at 9:30 a.m., Staff A stated the hospice had no administrative records related to the QAPI program for the hospice for calendar years 2022 and 2023. Additional request for administrative records yielded no results. On 08/21/24 at 9:20 a.m., Staff A stated: 1. The hospice had no QAPI program records for calendar years 2022, 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/20/24; and 2. The hospice was presently auditing patient records as a part of QAPI activities, but the hospice had not conducted a QAPI meeting in 2024.”

    Rule L0562. Standard-level.

  • Performance improvement projects (42 CFR 418.58(d)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 132 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure implementation and evaluation of PIPs for all patients, employees and volunteers. Findings: Administrative records related to the QAPI program for the hospice were requested. No administrative records related to the QAPI program were provided. On 08/20/24 at 9:30 a.m., Staff A stated the hospice had no administrative records related to the QAPI program for the hospice for calendar years 2022 and 2023. Additional request for administrative records yielded no results. On 08/21/24 at 9:20 a.m., Staff A stated: 1. The hospice had no QAPI program records for calendar years 2022, 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/20/24; and 2. The hospice was presently auditing patient records as a part of QAPI activities, but the hospice had not conducted a QAPI meeting in 2024.”

    Rule L0573. Standard-level.

  • Executive responsibilities (42 CFR 418.58(e)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 112 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure governing body oversite of the conduction of patient centered QAPI Program activities for all patients, volunteers, and employees. Findings: A review of administrative records showed no governing body oversite of an ongoing QAPI program for the hospice for calendar years 2022, 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/20/24. Additional requests for administrative records yielded no results. On 08/21/24 at 9:20 a.m., Staff A stated the hospice had no documentation which showed governing body oversite of QAPI program activities that included review and approval of data collection, analysis, implementation and follow up of QAPI activities for calendar years 2022, 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/20/24.”

    Rule L0574. Standard-level.

  • Control (42 CFR 418.60(b)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 152 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure its infection control program surveillance monitoring and reporting was included in QAPI program activities for calendar years 2022, 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/20/24 for all patients, volunteers, and employees. Findings: Administrative records related to the QAPI program for the hospice were requested. No administrative records related to the QAPI program were provided. On 08/20/24 at 9:30 a.m., Staff A stated the hospice had no administrative records related to the QAPI program for the hospice for calendar years 2022 and 2023. Additional request for administrative records yielded no results. On 08/21/24 at 9:20 a.m., Staff A stated: 1. The hospice had no QAPI program records for calendar years 2022, 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/20/24; 2. The hospice had not conducted a QAPI meeting in 2024; and The hospice had no infection surveillance data for calendar years 2022, 2023 and 01/01/24 to 08/20/24.”

    Rule L0580. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(3))

    The inspectors’ words, 146 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure volunteer services were a part of the hospice program for all patients, caregivers, and employees. Findings: A review of administrative records showed no hospice program volunteer activities from 05/12/23 to 08/20/24. On 08/21/24 at 10:35 a.m., a review of a personnel record for Staff I showed a job description as a medical social worker and showed no documentation or job description as the volunteer coordinator for the hospice. At 10:45 a.m., Staff A stated: 1. The hospice had no administrative records which showed volunteer service activities 05/12/23 to 08/20/24 and; 2. The hospice had no volunteer personnel other than the Volunteer Coordinator (identified as Staff I). At 11:05 a.m., Staff I stated: 1. She was the volunteer coordinator for the hospice; and 2. The hospice had no volunteer personnel for administrative or patient/caregiver related activities.”

    Rule L0684. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.112(e)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 450 words

    “Based on observation, record review and interview, the hospice failed to ensure the IDG communicated and coordinated the patients care with the residential care facility for four (Patients #1, 2, 4 and #8) of 14 patients. Findings: Patient #1 A review of the POC dated 08/07/24 to 11/05/24 showed orders for SN two times a week; hospice aide three times a week; medical social work one time a month; and chaplain services one time a month for palliation and management of terminal illness related to dementia. Documentation showed no IDG communications or coordination of care with the residential care facility. Patient #2 A review of the POC dated 08/07/24 to 11/05/24 showed orders for SN two times a week and hospice aide three times a week for palliation and management of terminal illness related to malnutrition. Documentation showed no IDG communications or coordination of care with the residential care facility. Patient #4 A review of the POC dated 06/20/24 to 09/18/24 showed orders for SN two times a week and hospice aide three times a week; medical social work one time a month; and chaplain services one time a month for palliation and management of terminal illness related to Alzheimers disease. Documentation showed no IDG communications or coordination of care with the residential care facility. Patient #8 A review of the POC dated 06/18/24 to 09/16/24 showed orders for SN two times a week and hospice aide three times a week for palliation and management of terminal illness related to Alzheimers disease. Documentation showed no IDG communications or coordination of care with the residential care facility. On 08/20/24 at 4:00 p.m., Residential Care Facility Staff #1 stated: 1. The hospice should leave a written report of any changes in a patient during a visit; 2. The hospice has not provided a POC which documented care services provided to patients #1, 2, 4 and #8; and 3. She did not know what disciplines of care or visit frequency and duration of each service discipline patients #1, 2, 4 and #8 received from the hospice. At 4:15 p.m., a review of the hospice binders (home chart) in the residential care facility for patients #1, 2 and #4 showed no POC or written communication by the IDG as an update to the POC; and patient #8 had no hospice binder (home chart) in the residential care facility. On 08/21/24 at 9:27 a.m. to 9:44 a.m., Staff A stated: 1. Documentation for patients #1, 2, 4 and #8 showed no IDG communications or coordination of care with the residential care facility and; 2. Each patient should have had an updated POC at each certification period and/or when the POC was changed by the IDG.”

    Rule L0780. Standard-level.

  • Criminal background checks (42 CFR 418.114(d)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 192 words

    “Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure required background checks were completed for six (Staff D, E, F, G, H and I) of six employee files reviewed. Findings: The “Long-Term Care Security Act Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes” documented requirement for an OKSCREEN national background check with fingerprinting for all employees of a home care agency whose employment began after 07/01/14. Staff D A review of the personnel record showed no documentation of a background check through OKSCREEN. Staff E A review of the personnel record showed no documentation of a background check through OKSCREEN. Staff F A review of the personnel record showed no documentation of a background check through OKSCREEN. Staff G A review of the personnel record showed no documentation of a background check through OKSCREEN. Staff H A review of the personnel record showed no documentation of a background check through OKSCREEN. Staff I A review of the personnel record showed no documentation of a background check through OKSCREEN. On 08/21/24 at 10:30 a.m., Staff A stated Staff D, E, F, G, H and I had no background check through the OkScreen database.”

    Rule L0795. Standard-level.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Aug 21, 2024Recertification inspection by the state14 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Sep 14, 2004.
  • Ownership: for-profit.
  • No deficiency or on record in the last three years.
Source:

CMS, Hospice General Information. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Has anything been proven against it?

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

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who does the caring?

  • From Medicare claims (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024): 5554.1 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 5.5% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 92.5% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 26% at home, 68% in assisted living, 6% in a nursing facility.
Source:

CMS, Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day5,554.1 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends5.5%
Visits near death92.5% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • Mcardle Healthcare Services LLC owns 95% directly since Jan 26, 2024; Kcm Strategic Services, LLC owns 2% directly since Apr 1, 2026.
  • 8 owners or officers are people: Bridget P Mcardle (owns 5% or more through other companies, 47.5%); William L Mcardle (owns 5% or more through other companies, 47.5%); Emily Gastineau (owns 5% or more directly, 3%); Kamilah Miller (owns 5% or more through other companies, 2%); Mark G Miles (managing employee (under contract)); Emily Gastineau (managing employee (on the payroll)); William L Mcardle (corporate director); Kristen Charpentier (corporate director).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospice All Owners and Hospice Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
William L Mcardle and Angela Pope Mcardle Family Living TrustOwns 5% or more through other companies95%Jan 26, 2024
Mcardle Healthcare Services LLCOwns 5% or more directly95%Jan 26, 2024
Kcm Strategic Services, LLCOwns 5% or more directly2%Apr 1, 2026

What do families say?

  • CMS gives no family caregiver survey rating: “The number of cases is too small to report Star Ratings.”
  • In CMS’s survey of family caregivers (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 91% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 84% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 8 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 88.55% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 70.8% had visits from a nurse or social worker on at least 2 of their last 3 days (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
Source:

CMS, CAHPS Hospice Survey and Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Family caregiver survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of patients’ family caregivers, 1 to 5Not rated
Hospice Care IndexCMS’s Hospice Care Index, 0 to 10 (higher is better): a point for each of ten measures from Medicare claims on which the hospice meets CMS’s threshold8 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 29 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 73116, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 6.5; this one had 14.
Source:

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • CMS ended its Special Focus Program for hospices with serious problems on Feb 14, 2025, so no hospice is marked as one.
  • Hospice quality measures have a gap from October 2025: CMS replaced its patient assessment then, and public results from the new one (HOPE) are expected around November 2027.

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 27, 2026.

From the hospice

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

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospice 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 hospice”, 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.