Gosnell Health And Rehab
700 Moody Street, Gosnell, AR 72315 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 70 certified beds · (870) 532-5550 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- the CMS record shows $13,627 in federal fines (most recent 2024-09-19)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
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
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
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.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 13.1% | 9.5% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.0% | 4.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.1% | 0.6% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.6% | 1.2% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 1.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.0% | 3.9% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 19.0% | 10.1% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 15.0% | 21.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 12.6% | 4.2% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 13.7% | 13.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.1% | 10.9% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 4.1% | 1.3% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.1% | 77.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 40.8% | 24.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.6% | 12.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.43 | 2.01 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.35 | 2.13 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
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.
38.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 40 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.09 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 5% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% 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.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 38.9%CMS range 27.1–51.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 13.2%CMS range 9.0–19.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 96.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.6%CMS range 4.4–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.16 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 70 beds and averages 58.6 residents a day — about 84% occupied, or roughly 11 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.68 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.57 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.40 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 2.96 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.97 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.70 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% 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.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, record review, observations, and document review, the facility failed to prevent an accident that caused serious injury during a van with lift transfer due to not following the manufacturer's guidelines for the lift and training for 1 (Resident #199) of 1 resident reviewed for accidents. This deficient practice resulted in Resident #199 sustaining a left ankle fracture on 09/10/2024, and a suspected fracture to the sacrum. The findings are: On 09/17/24 at 11:09 AM, during an interview with [NAME] President of Operations regarding incident he confirmed Certified Nurse Aide #1 (CNA #1) assisted with unloading Resident #199. CNA #1 failed to confirm the lift gate was up and ready for the transfer which caused the fall. CNA #1 was suspended until the end of the facility investigation, then terminated. On 09/17/24 at 11:11 AM, Director of Nursing (DON) interviewed regarding the incident on 09/10/2024 involving Resident #199. When asked what her immediate action was following the incident, she confirmed she assessed Resident #199 then sent the resident to the nearest…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, record review, facility document review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for one (Resident #5) of five residents reviewed for the resident's comprehensive assessment. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #5's comprehensive care plan included information that would require staff to provide care and monitor for resident safety. The findings include: A review of Resident #5's admission Record indicated the facility admitted the resident on 01/16/2026, with diagnoses which included nerve damage, muscle weakness, limitation of activities, type 2 diabetes mellitus, difficulty walking, inflammation of the spine, urinary tract infections, constipation, adjustment disorder, anemia, thyroid disorder, high cholesterol, sleep apnea, high blood pressure, irregular heartbeat, arthritis, chronic kidney disease, shortness of breath, fatigue, and stomach paralysis. A review of Resident #5's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure safety straps were placed and secured to all four wheels of a resident's wheelchair before being transported in the facility van which resulted in the resident falling backwards from the wheelchair for one (Resident #65) of four residents reviewed for accidents. The findings include: A review of Resident #65's Physician's Orders dated 12/31/2024, revealed an order to admit to long-term care on 09/18/2024. Resident #65's Physician's Orders also revealed diagnoses which included hemiplegia (complete or near-complete paralysis on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (partial weakness on one side of the body) which affected the right dominant side, and an acquired absence of left leg below the knee. Resident #65's Physician's Orders further revealed a medication for pain was ordered on 09/18/2024, to be given as needed every six hours. A review of Resident #65's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 12/19/2024, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 accurately code a Minimum Data Set (MDS) for a contracture under Section GG for one out of one sampled residents (Resident #3). These are the findings: A review of the Order Summary revealed Resident #3 had a diagnosis of stroke with left sided weakness/paralysis. A review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/05/2024 reveals that Resident #3 scored a 12 (moderate cognitive impairment) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS). A review of Section GG in the MDS reveals that for upper limited mobility was marked no impairment. On 09/16/2024 at 11:36 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #3 in bed with left hand contracture with no intervention in place. Surveyor observed that Resident #3 could not stretch the hand out, and they stated, that they have had the contracture for a while. On 09/16/2024 at 3:00 PM Surveyor observed Resident #3 up in wheelchair with left hand contracture and no interventions. On 09/19/2024 at 9:25 AM, during an interview Certified…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
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 residents who required assistance with foot care were regularly provided with the necessary assistance to maintain good hygiene and grooming, as evidenced by failure to ensure toenails were kept clean and trimmed for one resident of one sampled resident. (Resident #24). These are the findings: Review of an Order Summary Report revealed that Resident #24 had diagnoses of dementia, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, and need for assistance with personal care. There was no order for diabetic nail care for the nursing staff. Review of a Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/23/2024 revealed that Resident #24 scored a 4 (severe cognitive impairment) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS). Review of a Care Plan initiated on 03/26/2024 revealed that Resident #24 had an activity of daily living (ADL) deficit that stated to check nail length, trim, and clean on bath day and as necessary. Report any changes to the nurse. 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.
- Potential for harm · F2023-09-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure foods stored in the refrigerator and freezer were covered and dietary staff washed their hands before handling clean equipment or food items to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen. These failed practices had the potential to affect 56 residents who received meals from the kitchen (Total Census: 57), as documented on a list provided by the Dietary Supervisor on 09/26/23 at 3:01 PM. The findings are: 1.On 09/25/23 at 11:01 AM, the following observations were made on a shelf in the freezer: a. An opened box of polish sausage. The box was not covered or sealed. b. An opened box of sausage links. The box was not covered or sealed. c. An opened box of diced chicken. The box was not covered or sealed. d. An opened box of fish. The box was not covered or sealed. e. An opened box of briskets. The box was covered or sealed. 2. On 09/25/23 at 11:15 AM, two boxes of breadcrumbs were on a rack in the storage room with an expiration date of 7/20/23. 3. On 09/25/23 at 11:28 AM,…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-29 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's living space (9 of 37 rooms, the hallways (1 of 4), shower rooms (2 of 2) and equipment were clean and well maintained. The failed practice had the ability to affect all residents who live in the facility, who utilize the common areas and shower rooms according to the census and condition which was provided by the administrator on 9/25/23 at 1:30 PM. The findings are: Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] B: a. On 09/25/23 at 11:58 AM, observed a medication cup sitting on the windowsill. The cup was approximately 1/2 full of a white granulated substance. The Surveyor asked the resident if he was aware of what was in the cup. The resident stated, That started out as cream for my butt, but it's been there while. Three tiny spiders were in the area surrounding the cup and dead bugs extending down the length of the windowsill from side to side. b. On 09/26/23 at 9:30 AM, observed holes in the left wall. The dead insects and 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
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 portable oxygen was used when transporting a resident who required continuous oxygen for 1 (Resident #10) and oxygen tanks were checked to ensure the resident was receiving oxygen as ordered by the Physician for 1 (Resident #18) of 2 (Residents #10 and #18) sampled resident who received oxygen. The findings are: 1. Resident #10 had diagnoses of Chronic Respiratory Failure, Unspecified whether with Hypoxia or Hypercapnia. a. On 09/27/23 at 2:05 pm, Resident #10 was seated in a wheelchair being pushed by staff down the hall from the therapy room. Resident #10 had her nasal cannula in her nose, but the nasal cannula tubing was not connected to an oxygen cylinder and a portable oxygen cylinder was not on the back of the wheelchair. The Surveyor followed the resident down the hall and into her room. The Occupational Therapist connected Resident #10's oxygen tubing to a stationary oxygen tank at the bedside. Resident #10 stated, I'm a little short of breath. The Surveyor asked the Occupational Therapist if…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-29 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
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 Medicaid recipient residents and/or their responsible parties were notified when the amount in their Trust Fund account was within $200 of the maximum Medicaid recipient cash assets for 3 (Residents #9, #18 and #30) of 12 (Residents #1, #8, #9, #18, #23, #24, #25, #26, #30, #32, #36 and #41) sampled residents who had Medicaid coverage and had Trust Funds managed by the facility. The findings are: 1. On 09/27/23 at 1:00 PM, the Surveyor received the resident Trust Fund balances from the Business Office Manager (BOM) and noted Resident #9 had a balance of $1877.93, Resident #18 had a balance of $1867.97, and Resident #30 had a balance of $1892.90. 2. On 09/27/23 at 2:48 PM, the Surveyor asked the BOM for the documentation regarding the Medicaid notification letters for Resident #9, Resident #18, and Resident #30. The BOM stated she had not sent out the notification letters. The Surveyor asked how do you let resident/family know that they are approaching the maximum amount allowed by Medicaid. The BOM stated, I send…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-29 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's representative or Power of Attorney (POA) was notified after a resident choked and the Heimlich Maneuver was performed for 1 (Resident #32) of 1 sampled resident. The findings are: 1. On 09/26/23 at 11:09 am, during Resident Council Meeting a resident stated, I just wanted to give kudos to [Name], the Activity Director, for helping the man [Resident #32] seated across the table from me in Bingo, who choked on the [Name] candy. She did the Heimlich and saved him. 2. On 09/27/23 at 1:49 pm, the Surveyor asked the Activity Director/Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1, Can you tell me about an incident that happened during an activity this week? Activity Director/CNA #1 stated, Oh yes. On Monday afternoon after Bingo, I was passing out snacks when a resident at the table with Resident #32 reported to me that the resident seated beside him was choking. I told the transport driver to go get the nurse, but I didn't feel she came quick…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-29 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and record review, the facility failed to ensure insulin vials were dated when opened, and expired medications were removed from the narcotic box. This failed practice had the potential to affect 8 residents who received insulin off the medication cart for the 100 and 200 Halls, and (1) resident with an expired narcotic card. The findings are: 1. On 9/27/23 at 2:07 PM, the following observations were made in the Medication Room: a. The Medication Cart had one opened vial of Novolog Insulin with no open date on it. b. The Medication Cart had one card of Trazadone with an expiration date of 9/14/23 in the locked narcotic box. c. On 9/27/23 at 2:28 PM, the Surveyor asked Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 how often do you check your medication cart for expired medications. LPN #3 stated, When I can. d. On 9/29/23 at 9:34 AM, the Surveyor asked the Director of Nursing (DON) how often do you check the carts for expired medications? The DON stated, Assistant Director of Nursing [ADON], and myself check it monthly. The night shift nurses check it randomly and 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.
“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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$13,627 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $13,627 — 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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VANN, DAVID | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | 50% | since 11/01/2018 |
| WRIGHT, BOYD | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | 50% | since 02/26/2026 |
| MCGINNIS, LARRY | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/10/2007 |
| FIRST ARKANSAS BANK AND TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2018 |
| GNNC, INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2018 |
| COOPER, BENJAMIN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2013 |
| HARTLEY, JAMES | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2025 |
| WILKES, PAMELA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/12/2021 |
| WRIGHT, BLAKE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 11/01/2018 |
| CARE SYSTEMS, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/25/2026 |
| CREDENCE HEALTH CARE, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/25/2026 |
| PHARMACY CONSULTS, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/25/2026 |
| BOTHA, AMY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/20/2025 |
| JARVIS, DAVID | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/09/2025 |
| HEALTH CARE SOLUTIONS, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2018 |
| COOPER, JAMES | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2013 |
| COOPER, ROBERT | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2013 |
| HAHN, MARK | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 35 rows in the source record cover these 18 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
6 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.
About 72% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $735K 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. 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, FY2023). 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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Arkansas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 045439. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-26, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.