Nightingale At Crossett

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

29.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 32 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 46.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 30 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 83 beds and averages 56.4 residents a day — about 68% occupied, or roughly 27 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.18 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.94 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.85 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

17 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure expired food was removed from a resident's bedside cooler for 1 (Resident #9) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for bedside snacks; failed to ensure cake product stored in the freezer was not mushy and unpalatable, other foods were covered or sealed to decrease the potential for cross contamination; dietary staff thoroughly washed their hands and changed gloves when contaminated and before handling food and clean equipment to decrease the potential for food borne illness for residents receiving food from 1 of 1 kitchen; expired food items and spices were promptly removed/discarded on or before the expiration or use by date; hot food items were maintained at the required temperatures on the steam table to prevent potential food borne illness. These failed practices had the potential to affect residents who received meals from the kitchen (with a total census of 55), according to the list provided by the Dietary Service Manager. The findings are. 1. On 09/16/2024 at 9:40 AM, one angel…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-09-19 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — widespread
  Conduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility assessment included pertinent information to assure the necessary care and resources were allocated to meet the needs of the residents in 1 of 1 facility. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents of the facility The findings are: A review of the Facility Assessment, dated as approved 09/03/2024 and reviewed by the Quality Assurance and Assessment (QAA) committee on 09/05/2024, did not contain the following required information: a. Documentation of the member of the governing body responsible for the completion of the assessment. No name was listed to indicate who the governing body member was. b. Addressed the staffing needs of each resident unit to ensure coordination and continuity of care. The facility has an East, West, and Secure Unit and the assessment only addressed the East unit staffing needs. c. Staff training/education and competency-based skill set approach to make informed staffing decisions to ensure residents are able to maintain or attain their highest…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-09-19 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — pattern
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility document review. the facility failed to ensure an indwelling catheter tube was secured to a resident's leg for 1 (Resident #41) of 1 sampled resident who was reviewed for an indwelling catheter and failed to ensure that 1 sampled (Resident #25) resident received proper incontinence care. The findings are: 1. On 09/16/2024 at 11:05 AM, Resident #41 was observed lying in bed and a catheter bag was hooked on the right side of the bed frame in a privacy bag. Resident #41 was asked if anything was on either leg to keep the catheter in place. The resident pulled the blanket back and there was no device to secure the indwelling catheter tubing to either of the resident's legs. On 09/16/2024 at 11:20 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 was interviewed with concurrent observations and she was asked to look at Resident #41's indwelling catheter tubing and see if the tubing was secured to either of the resident's legs. CNA #1 confirmed there was no device on either leg to secure the resident's indwelling catheter tubing. She was…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-09-19 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure and provide pharmaceutical services which included accurate administration of all drugs and/or biologics to 1 (Resident #11) sampled resident. The findings include: 1. A review of the Order Summary Report Resident #11 had an order for (Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen 5-325 mg), an opioid medication, as needed for pain. a. Review of a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) with the Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/1/2024 revealed Resident #11 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 4, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #11 was not taking an opioid medication. b. A plan of care for Resident #11 (revision date 9/06/2024) revealed Resident #11 had pain related to osteoarthritis (OA), and an intervention noted was administer pain medications as ordered/needed .notify medical doctor (MD)/Practitioner if not effective. c. A review of the Controlled Drug Record indicated Resident #11's opioid was signed by nursing staff as having been administered on…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-09-19 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
  Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure meals were prepared and served according to the planned written menu to meet the nutritional needs of the residents for 1 of 2 meals observed. This failed practice had the potential to affect residents who received pureed diets and residents who had mechanical soft diets from 1 of 1 kitchen according to a list provided by the Dietary Service Manager. The findings are. 1. On 09/17/2024, a facility noon menu indicated the following: residents on regular diets were to receive 4 ounces of country ranch chicken, residents on pureed diets were to receive a #8 scoop (4 ounces) of pureed country ranch chicken, and residents on mechanical soft diets were to receive a # 8 scoop (4 ounces) of ground country ranch chicken, and one-half (1/2) cup of cauliflower. 2. On 09/16/2024 at 12:52 PM, the following observations were made during the noon meal service. a. Dietary [NAME] (DC) #3 used a 3-ounce ladle to serve a single portion of mechanical soft country ranch chicken to the residents on mechanical soft diets,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed Enhanced Barrier Precautions(EBP) for a resident with a Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) tube (a feeding tube inserted through the belly and into the stomach) for 1 (Resident #1) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for enhanced barrier precautions and failed to ensure that 1 sampled (Resident #25) resident received proper incontinence care. The findings are: On 09/18/2024 at 8:29 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #6 was interviewed with concurrent observations during the 8:00 AM medication administration pass for Resident #1. At 8:59 AM, LPN #6 entered Resident #1's room to administer Resident's 8 AM medications. Once the medications and other items were on the bedside table, she raised the resident's bed up higher. She put on a clean pair of gloves but did not put on a gown. After changing a patch on the resident's left arm, LPN #6 picked up the PEG tube, connected a 60 cubic centimeter (cc) syringe, without the plunder, to the opening of the PEG tube and…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed ensure that 1 (Resident #25) sampled resident's dignity was maintained while receiving care. The findings include: Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with the Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 8/30/2024 revealed Resident #25 scored 4 on the Brief Interview of Mental Status indicating severe impaired cognition, and the resident was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. A plan of care for Resident #25 (revision date 3/07/2024) revealed Resident #25 had frequent bladder and bowel incontinence related to Alzheimer's and required staff to clean peri-area with each incontinence episode. On 09/18/24 at 9:15 AM, the Surveyor observed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #7 providing Resident #25 with incontinence care with the bathroom door open and curtain unpulled in the presence of the resident's roommate. On 09/18/24 at 9:16 AM, CNA #7 stated, I know I did wrong and confirmed she did not pull that curtain to provide Resident #25 with privacy. On 09/18/24 at 11:30 AM, the…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents had access to their personal funds through the week and on weekends. The findings are: On 09/16/2024 at 10:45 AM, Resident #30 was lying in bed awake. The resident was asked if the resident had an account at the facility and the resident stated yes. The resident was asked when can money be requested, and the resident stated money could only be requested on Monday, Wednesday and Friday each week. The resident was asked what if money needed to be requested on weekends, what did the resident do and the resident stated no one was there on the weekends for the resident to request money. Resident #41 stated money had to be requested on Friday if needed for the weekend. Resident #30's census in the electronic health record was reviewed and indicated the resident's primary payer source was Medicaid. Resident #30's Order Summary Report was reviewed and indicated the resident had a diagnosis of a loss of muscle function in the lower half of the body (paraplegia). Resident #30's…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to notify the proper state authority when aware that one (Resident #5) sampled Resident had a new diagnosis of a mental disorder. The findings include: According to the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with the Assessment Referenced Date (ARD) of 7/11/2024 revealed Resident #5 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 05 indicating severe cognitive impairment and had the diagnoses of bipolar disorder and depression. A plan of care for Resident #5 (revision date 11/14/2021) revealed Resident #5 used psychotropic medications related (r/t) behavior management for bipolar disorder, mood disorder, and potential for injury to self and/or others. A review of the form 787 submitted State Designated Professional Associates letter on 8/29/2022 noted Resident #5 had a diagnosis or history of mental illness but did not note the resident had bipolar disorder. On 9/17/24 at 11:35 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated Resident #5 had the following mental illness/disorder: intellectual disorder, major depression, dementia,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure nail care was consistently provided to promote good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (Resident #18) resident reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care. The findings are: Review of the Medical Diagnosis portion of Resident #18's health record had diagnoses of hemiplegia (one side paralysis) and hemiparesis (one sided muscles weakness) following cerebrovascular disease affecting left non-dominant side and type 2 diabetes mellitus. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/22/2024, revealed Resident #18 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status [BIMS] score of 3, which indicates the resident has severe cognitive impairment. Resident #18's Care Plan, initiated on 03/28/2023, indicated the resident had an ADL self-care performance deficit related to confusion, dementia, impaired balance, limited mobility, and limited range of motion, and the resident was dependent totally dependent on one staff member to provide bathing/showing on Monday, Wednesday, and…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$12,353 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $12,353 — penalty dated 2024-09-19

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to NIGHTINGALE — 5 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 30 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

8 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $592K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in AR