No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Woodbriar Nursing Home

204 Catherine St, Harrisburg, AR 72432 · For profit - Corporation · 80 certified beds · (870) 578-2483 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (870) 578-2483 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Apr 2026$16,467 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Apr 2026
  • the CMS record shows $16,467 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-20)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
1/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2624 Highway 42 · (870) 442-2040 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
605 N Illinois St · (870) 578-5200 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
605 N Illinois St · (870) 578-2434 · Call to confirm hours
Park
306 N Main St · (870) 578-4490 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
813 N Illinois St · (870) 578-2604

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 1 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 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 4 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased13.8%9.5%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.5%4.3%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.3%0.6%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.4%1.2%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%1.4%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained1.3%0.1%0.1%worse
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.1%3.9%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.7%10.1%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication31.5%21.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.2%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.9%4.2%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control12.2%13.5%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table29.0%10.9%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication3.6%1.3%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine82.6%77.7%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission30.9%24.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.3%12.5%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days3.972.011.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.982.131.80worse

* 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.

33.4% 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 29 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

33.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
33.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.50U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.25hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.20hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 33.3% 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 33 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 0.50 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 81% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF33.4%CMS range 23.8–48.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.3%CMS range 8.6–17.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge33.3%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge36.4%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge36.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified98.3%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting96.4%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization11.3%CMS range 7.5–16.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.501.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.34
RN hours/ resident / day
0.85
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.64
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.84
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.29
RN hoursweekends
30.0%
Total nursing turnover
20.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 63.1 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 17 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 4.84 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.34 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.64 is at or above 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 4.52 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.96 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.36 to 0.29 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below the national median of 45%.

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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-09)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-10)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-09 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    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 observations, record review, interview and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) was accurate and complete to facilitate the ability to plan and provide necessary care and services for three (Residents #4, #17 and #64) of three residents reviewed. The findings include:Resident #4Review of an admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #4 with diagnoses that included atherosclerotic heart disease (a buildup of fats and cholesterol in the artery walls, leading to narrowed or hardened arteries) and cerebral infarction (a stroke caused by blockage in an artery supplying blood to the brain).Review of a quarterly MDS with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/09/2026 for Resident #4 revealed that the resident was taking medications that included an anticoagulant (medication that prevents or reduces the formation of blood clots) and an antiplatelet (medication that prevents blood platelets from sticking together. Review of an…

    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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from verbal and mental abuse for one (Resident #38) of four residents reviewed. The findings include: Review of Resident #38's admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #38 on 04/12/2022 with diagnoses that included dementia, mood disorder, bipolar disorder, limitations of activities due to disabilities, altered mental status, a sleeping disorder, and an excessive persistent thirst with an insatiable urge to drink fluids. Review of an annual Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 01/12/2026, revealed Resident #38 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated no acute altered mental status present, no behaviors had been displayed towards others, and no impairment to arms or legs. The MDS also revealed Resident #38 used a wheelchair for mobility and Resident #38's eating skills were indicated as…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to document and complete a person-centered care plan to facilitate the ability to plan and provide necessary care and services for 1 (Residents #38) sampled resident whose care plan was reviewed. The findings are: 1. A review of an admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #38 with diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke), hypertension (high blood pressure), and congestive heart failure (a condition in which a person heart doesn't pump correctly). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 8/13/2024 revealed Resident #38 had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. In Section N part N0415 subpart E Anticoagulant (blood thinner) revealed that it was marked as given within the last 7 days of ARD period. Review of Resident #38's Care Plan, with completed update on 10/9/2024, revealed the resident did not have anticoagulants nor the medication Eliquis (Blood thinner) care planned. During an…

    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 · D2024-10-10 · tag F0728 — failed to protect against nurse-aide misconduct — isolated
    Ensure that nurse aides who have worked more than 4 months, are trained and competent; and nurse aides who have worked less than 4 months are enrolled in appropriate training.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, employee record review, and document review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure five Nursing Assistants (NA) completed competency training and failed to complete the certification testing within 120 days from completion of their initial training. The findings are: Reviewed employee records of all reported full-time Nursing Assistants (NA) employed at the facility on10/09/2024 at 1:30 PM, all five NAs were hired within the last three months, and each had not yet completed the certification process. The only records provided were the certificates stating the completion of the initial 90-hour training. There were no records showing competencies from the initial training, nor any from the facility in which they were employed. During an interview on 10/09/2024 at 2:40 PM, the Human Resources/Social Services (HR/Social) confirmed the facility has five NAs which have not completed the requirements for certification. Records provided by the facility indicate the following are NAs awaiting testing certification and dates of completion of initial 90 hours of…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-08-18 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
    Provide 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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received oxygen therapy at the physician ordered flow rate. This failed practice affected 2 (Resident #17, #19) of 3 (Resident #17, #19, #34) sampled residents, residing on the 200 Hall who had orders for oxygen, according to a list provided by the Administrator on 08/17/2023 at 10:48 AM. The findings are: 1.The following observations were made of Resident #17: a. On 08/14/23 at 3:09 PM Resident #17 was sitting in her room in her wheelchair. Her oxygen was set at 1.5 liters per minute. b. On 08/16/23 at 8:42 AM Resident #17 was sitting at bedside in a wheelchair, with oxygen off. Concentrator on and set on 1.5 liters, nasal cannula in a bag dated, 08/13/23. I usually have that oxygen on. The Surveyor asked if she puts oxygen on and off by herself. No, the nurse or Certified Nursing Assistant [CNA] puts it on me. I cough a lot and need it since I had pneumonia. c. On 08/16/23 at 10:10 AM Resident #17 was sitting in a wheelchair resting with her eyes closed, Oxygen on at 1-1.5 liters per minute.…

    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 · E2023-08-18 · 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, interview and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to prevent the potential for infection and cross contamination in the facility laundry processing area as evidenced by staff placing half consumed food and drinks on the laundry folding table next to clean, folded resident linens. This failed practice had the potential to effect 18 (Resident #1, #3, #4, #5, #8, #16, #17, #19, #20, #26, #34, #37, #39, #40, #46, #51, #54 and #59) sampled residents, and 62 residents who have their laundry done in the facility based on a list provided by the Administrator on 08/18/23 at 8:41 AM. The findings are: a. During a facility tour of the Laundry Room on 08/17/23 at 1:58 PM, the Surveyor observed a soft drink in a plastic bottle sitting on top of the folding counter surface next to a stack of clean, pink folded transfer pads. There was a clear, plastic cup half full of a brown colored liquid covered with a plastic lid with an exposed straw sitting near the right corner end of the stainless-steel countertop. There were 2 containers of salsa in Styrofoam cups with…

    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 · D2023-08-18 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect, dignity, and to care for residents in a manner to protect their right to a dignified existence and privacy. This failed practice affected 1 (Resident #16) of 3 (Resident #9, #16, #63), residents and had the potential to affect 10 residents residing on 100 Hall. The findings are: 1. During facility observations on 08/14/23 at 11:29 AM, Resident #16 pointed to her bathroom and said, They locked the bathroom door, and gave my roommate a bedside commode. If I want to use the bathroom, I must go down the hallway. It's a good bathroom. They said the bathroom was too small and we might get hurt. Can you help me get my door unlocked? Certified Nursing Assistant [CNA] #2 walked in and said, I could hear through the door, we locked her bathroom door. When she calls, we take her to the bathroom up front. Resident #16 said, They let my roommate use a bedside commode, but told me I could not use one. I do not…

    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 · D2023-08-18 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to secure confidential and private medical information on an open laptop. This failed practice had the potential to affect all 13 residents residing on 200 Hall according to a census of 200 Hall received from the Administrator [Admin] on 08/14/2023 at 11:20 AM. The findings are: 1. On 08/16/23 at 2:26 PM, during facility rounds on 200 Hall, the Surveyor observed an open laptop, sitting on a small table. The laptop was open with the 200-Hall Census, in clear view of anyone walking in the 200 Hallway. 2. On 08/16/23 at 2:27 PM, Registered Nurse [RN] #1 came out of a resident room. The Surveyor asked RN #1 if it was appropriate for a computer to be left on with resident information pulled up, and visible to anyone in the hallway. RN #1 said, No, it is absolutely not appropriate. The Surveyor observed RN #1 lock the computer screen. During the interview RN #1 said, The screen should be off or locked. Anyone, like yourself, could see medical information on any resident we have. It is Health Insurance Portability 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-18 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure fingernails were clean, groomed, and free from chipped nail polish to promote good personal hygiene and grooming for 1 (Resident #51) of 7 (Resident #4, #20, #37, #39, #46, #51 and #59) sampled residents that were dependent on staff for fingernail care on the Special Care Unit. This failed practice had the potential to affect 16 residents that lived on the Special Care Unit and were dependent on staff for nail care according to a list provided by the Administrator on 8/18/23 at 8:40AM. The findings are: 1. Resident #51 had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's Dementia, Anxiety, and Osteoarthritis. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 6/2/23 documented that she scored 1 (0-7 indicates severe impairment) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), required extensive assistance with dressing, toileting, personal hygiene, limited assistance with bed mobility, transfer, and supervision with eating.…

    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
  • No harm found · C2024-10-10 · tag F0848 — widespread
    Provide a neutral and fair arbitration process and agree to arbitrator and venue.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to include the selection of a neutral arbitrator to be agreed upon by both parties and for the selection of a venue convenient to both parties in the Arbitration Agreement. The findings are: 1. On 10/07/2024 at 10:30 AM, the facility's Arbitration Agreement was received from the Administrator as part of the admission packet. 2. During an interview on 10/09/2024 at 9:30 AM, the Human Resource(HR)/Social said during admission she defined an arbitration as if a dispute comes up, it would be handled by an arbitrator instead of going to court. She explains the arbitration agreement after the resident/representative read the agreement, then she asks the questions on the 3rd page to make sure the resident/representative understands before signing. HR/Social said the agreement doesn't include the selection of a neutral arbitrator would be agreed upon by both parties and that the selection of a venue would be convenient to both parties. 3. During an interview on 10/10/2024 at 9:44 AM, the Administrator said there is a paragraph…

    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
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$16,467 in federal fines across 4 penalties.

  • $3,418 — penalty dated 2024-02-20
  • $3,039 — penalty dated 2024-02-12
  • $6,836 — penalty dated 2024-01-22
  • $3,174 — penalty dated 2023-09-11

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 / managerTypeRoleSince
HOUCHIN, VONDAIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/07/2025
JAMES, EMILYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/07/2025
CARE MANAGEMENT, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/1998
SAMPSON, RICKIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/07/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner 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.

$7.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+15.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$92K
Related-party expense2% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 65%Medicare 13%Other / private 21%

This home reported $92K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$262per resident / day
operating cost
$7,957per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$309per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Arkansas
$7,452/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$8,060/mo
Nursing home (private)
$4,637/mo
Assisted living

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 045384. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-09, 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.

What to do next