Nursing And Rehabilitation Center At Good Shepherd

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.

42.2% 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 186 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 35.2% 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 54 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 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 17% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% 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 120 beds and averages 78.8 residents a day — about 66% occupied, or roughly 41 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 4.09 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.22 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.60 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 3.59 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.29 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.18 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 65% is well above 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

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.

26 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  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 Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were followed during medication administration through a Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) tube for one (Resident #3) sampled resident based on one of one observation. Specifically, nursing staff did not wear a gown for Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) during medication pass. The findings include: A review of Resident #3's Medical Diagnosis revealed the resident had diagnoses which included stroke, dysphagia, and heart attack. A review of Resident #3's quarterly Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 11/20/2025, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 00, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Resident #3's MDS also indicated the resident had a feeding tube. A review of Resident #3's Care Plan, revised 07/01/2024, revealed the resident was on EBP related to a PEG tube, gown and glove during high contact resident care including feeding tubes. A review of Resident #3's Order Summary…

  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 · F2024-10-04 · 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 total census was 100 residents. The findings are: A review of the Comprehensive Facility Assessment, dated November 2017, did not contain the following required information: - The physical environment, equipment, services, and other physical plant considerations that are necessary to care for this population. - The care required by the resident population, using evidence-based, data-driven methods that consider an evaluation of diseases, conditions, physical and behavioral health needs, cognitive status, acuity of the resident population consistent with resident assessments to help the facility understand the potential implications regarding the intensity of care and services needed. - Staffing's plan is to evaluate of the overall number of facility staff needed to…

  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 · Ecited before2024-10-04 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — pattern
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and in-service review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure resident's call lights were in reach for 5 (Residents #13, #24, #51, #80, and #96) of 25 sampled residents. The findings are: 1. On 9/30/2024 at 9:52 am, observed Resident #80's call light was not in reach. Resident was sitting in a chair in front of the dresser and the call light was located under the right side of the bedframe. a. At 11:18 am, Resident #96's call light was not in reach. The call light was located on the left side of the bed with the button dangling right above the floor. b. At 12:30 pm, Resident #13's call light was not in reach. The call light was tied to the left side handrail that was pushed up against the wall and the button was hanging below the handrail where it was not visible. 2. On 10/01/2024 at 8:59 am, observed Resident #24's and Resident #51's call lights were not in reach. Resident #24's call light was tied to the left side of the handrail with the button dangling below the handrail, not visible to the resident. Resident #51's call light 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-04 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor 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 observations, interviews, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility failed to clean and sanitize the shower room on 500 Hall which was reviewed for environmental concerns. Findings include: A review of a facility policy titled, Resident Rights, revised on 11/22/2016, indicated the resident would receive adequate and appropriate care to include personal cleanliness in a safe and clean environment. During an observation on 10/01/2024 at 8:30 AM, the spa/shower room on the 500 hall was noted to have large scrape marks along the shower room stalls, an unidentified brownish/black residue was noted along the edges of each shower room stall where the floor meets the walls, there was unidentified brownish substance stain on the tiled walls and the sink area was cluttered with supplies. During an interview on 10/01/2024 at 2:15 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that there was a black/brown substance noted along the edges of the shower stalls, brown substances splattered on 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 · E2024-10-04 · tag F0641 — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accurately completed for 2 (Resident #88, and Resident #30) of 25 residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure information regarding the resident's medication regimen was accurately completed for Resident #30 and failed to ensure information regarding a fall with major injury was accurately completed for Resident #88. Findings include: On 10/03/2024 at 11:05 AM, the nurse consultant stated the facility did not have a policy for the Minimum Data Set (MDS) and that the facility uses the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual. 1. A review of the admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #88 with diagnoses that included polyneuropathy (damage to multiple nerves outside of the brain and central nervous system), muscle weakness, lack of coordination, muscle wasting and atrophy, chronic pain, and scoliosis. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-10-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  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 observations, interviews, record review, facility document review, it was determined the facility failed to update and/or revise the resident's care plan for 5 (Residents #7, #36, #91, #30, and #72) of 25 residents reviewed for comprehensive care planning. Specifically, the facility failed to include unnecessary medications for Resident #30, change in wound care status for Resident #72, and falls for Resident #7, #36, and #91. Findings include: On 10/03/2024 at 11:05 AM, the nurse consultant stated the facility did not have a policy for care plans and the facility followed the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual. 1. A review of the admission Record, indicated the facility admitted Resident #7 with diagnoses that included dementia, cognitive communication deficit, age related osteoporosis, muscle wasting and atrophy, and glaucoma. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/16/2024, revealed Resident #7 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 4 which indicated the resident was had moderate cognitive impairment.…

  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 · Ecited before2024-10-04 · 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 ensure nutritionally balanced meals were provided for the residents for 2 of 2 meals observed. The findings are. 1. On 9/30/2024, the noon meal menu indicated residents on pureed diets were to receive 8 ounces of pureed pizza, this was the resident's choice for the meal of the month. 2. On 9/30/2024 at 12:30 PM, Dietary [NAME] (DC) #3 used a #8 scoop, which is equivalent to 4 ounces, to serve a single portion of pureed pizza to the residents who received pureed diets. Instead of 8 ounces of pureed pizza. 3. On 9/30/2024 at 1:19 PM, when asked during an interview the Dietary Manager stated this was residents' choice for the meal of the month. The residents on pureed diets were to receive 8 ounces of pureed pizza. 4. On 10/1/2024, the breakfast menu indicated residents on pureed diets were to receive pureed hot cereal. On 10/01/24 at 7:45 AM, the residents on pureed diets were served regular oatmeal, instead of pureed oatmeal. 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure foods stored in the refrigerator and freezer were dated to ensure first in and first out; expired dairy products were promptly removed/discarded on or before the expiration or use by date, to prevent the potential for foodborne illnesses; manufacturer's instructions were followed to prevent potential for food spoilage and or bacteria growth; 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, and hot food items were maintained at 135 degrees Fahrenheit or above on the steam table while awaiting service to prevent potential food borne illness for 1 of 1 meals observed. The findings are: 1. On 9/30/24 at 10:03 AM, an opened bottle of Worcestershire sauce was on the rack. The manufacturer specification on the bottle indicated, Refrigerate after opening. 2. On 9/30/24 at 10:15 AM, Dietary Aide (DA) #1 picked up the water hose with his gloved hand and used it to spray off leftover food from inside of 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-04 · 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, facility document review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide dignity regarding cleaning the resident after meals for one (Resident #72) of one resident reviewed for resident rights regarding dignity. Findings include: A review of a facility policy titled, Resident Rights, revised on 11/22/2016, indicated residents would receive adequate and appropriate nursing care and personal cleanliness in a safe and clean environment. A review of the admission Record, indicated the facility admitted Resident #72 with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease with late onset and chronic pain. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/19/2024, revealed Resident #72 required set up or clean up assistance with eating and supervision and touching assistance with personal hygiene and upper body dressing. A review of Resident #72's Care Plan, initiated on 01/19/2023, revealed the resident had an Activity of Daily Living (ADL) self-care performance deficit. Intervention…

  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 · Dcited before2024-10-04 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  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 observations, interviews, record review, facility document review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure an oxygen concentrator was clean, set at the correct rate for delivery, and the tubing was dated appropriately for 1 (Resident #25) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for oxygen therapy. Findings include: A review of a facility policy titled, Oxygen Safety, revised on 11/22/2016, indicated oxygen therapy is to be administered to the resident per physician orders and that it must be tagged, or properly labeled. There was no policy regarding oxygen concentrators provided. A review of the admission Record, indicated the facility admitted Resident #25 with diagnoses that included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia. The 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/23/2024, revealed Resident #25 required oxygen therapy. A review of Resident #25's care plan, initiated on 07/18/2024, revealed the resident had oxygen therapy. Interventions included to give the medications as ordered by the physician, monitor 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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CENTRAL ARKANSAS NURSING CENTERS — 38 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 8 rows in the source record cover these 6 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.

3 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 $1.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% 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 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