Manila Healthcare Center
2975 W State Highway 18, Manila, AR 72442 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 84 certified beds · (870) 561-3342 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- 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) | 4 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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.
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 | 24.9% | 9.5% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.4% | 4.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.4% | 0.6% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 5.8% | 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 | 1.3% | 3.9% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 36.6% | 10.1% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 30.0% | 21.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.2% | 13.5% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.4% | 10.9% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.8% | 1.3% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 87.2% | 77.7% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.7% | 24.1% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.0% | 12.5% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.98 | 2.01 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.77 | 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.12 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 8% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 6.7–16.0 | 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 | 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 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.98 | 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 84 beds and averages 75.9 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 4.12 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.98 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 3.64 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.32 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.59 to 0.57 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were implemented for one (Resident #17) of two residents reviewed for EBP and failed to ensure hand hygiene was consistently implemented during incontinence care for one (Resident #46) of one resident reviewed for incontinence care.The findings include:Resident #17A review of Resident #17's Physician's Orders, dated 03/16/2026, revealed all medications were to be administered by way of (via) a Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) tube, with a start date of 04/10/2024. The resident had an active order for EBP related to indwelling devices, with a start date of 06/24/2024. A review of Resident #17's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/18/2025, revealed a Staff Assessment for Mental Status (SAMS) score of 3, which indicated the resident was severely impaired and never/rarely made decisions. Resident #17's MDS also revealed the resident had a feeding tube while a resident.A review of Resident #17's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-19 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Number of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that one (Resident #95) of one resident reviewed for self-determination, had the opportunity to exercise autonomy in choosing when to have medication administered. The findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #95 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with (acute) exacerbation, congestive heart failure, pneumonia, vitamin deficiency, dizziness, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Review of Resident #95's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) revealed that the MDS was in progress. Review of the CMT Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 03/16/2026 revealed that Resident #95 refused the following medications: an antibiotic, a high blood pressure medication, an allergy medication, vitamin, an iron supplement, an anticholinergic, a probiotic, a blood thinner, an antacid, an oral steroid, 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-19 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Number of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a Comprehensive Care Plan was consistently implemented for one (Resident #17) of four residents reviewed. The findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included epilepsy, restless leg syndrome and hemiplegia and hemiparesis (decreased sensation or mobility on one side of the body) affecting the right dominant side. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 12/18/2025, revealed Resident #17 had a Staff Assessment for Mental Status score of 03, which indicated Resident #17 had severe cognitive impairment, never/rarely made decisions, and was dependent on staff for rolling left and right. Review of March 2026 Physician's Orders revealed Resident #17 was receiving comfort measures only. Review of a Care Plan with a revised date of 02/01/2020, revealed…
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 · D2026-03-19 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 Number of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on observations, interviews, record reviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure nails were trimmed for one (Resident #4) of three residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care. The findings include: Review of a facility policy on nail care titled Fingernails/Toenails, Care of revealed the propose of nail care is the clean the nail bed, keep nails trimmed, and prevent infections. The policy revealed that nail care included daily cleaning and regular trimming. The policy revealed that the condition of a resident's nails and nail bed should be documented in the resident's medical record. The policy revealed that proper nail care helps to prevent skin problems around the nail bed. The policy revealed nails should be trimmed and smooth to prevent the resident from accidentally scratching and injuring his skin and the nurse supervisor should be contacted if there is evidence of ingrown nails, or if the nails are too hard…
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 · D2026-03-19 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Number of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to add oxygen to the Physician Orders for one (Resident #40) of two residents reviewed for oxygen orders. The findings include: Review of Resident #40's admission Record indicated that the facility admitted Resident #40 on 12/11/2025 with diagnoses which included pneumonia, shortness of breath, obstructive sleep apnea, and acute bronchitis. Review of a discharge return anticipated Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/28/2026 revealed Resident #40 had modified independence for daily decision according to a Staff Assessment of Mental Status (SAMS). Review of Residents #40's Physician Orders did not indicate that Resident #40 had an order for oxygen administration. Review of a form titled Standing Orders dated 02/08/2021, signed by the Nurse Practitioner (NP), indicated to administer oxygen at 2-4 liters per minute as needed for shortness of breath and/or a pulse oximetry less than 90%. Review of Resident #40's Care Plan did…
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 · D2026-03-19 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Number of residents sampled:Number of residents cited:Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #14) of one resident reviewed for pain management, received their pain medication when requested. The findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #14 on 10/18/2024 with diagnoses which included age-related osteoporosis with current pathological fracture. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 1/20/2026, revealed Resident #14 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 15 which indicated Resident #14 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #14's Order Summary Report with a start date of 10/18/2024, revealed a Physician's Order for an opioid pain medication, to be given every eight hours as needed (PRN) for pain. Review of Resident #14's Care Plan, revised on 10/26/2024, revealed the resident had acute pain related to fracture of the back, and osteoporosis. The Care Plan interventions included to anticipate the resident's need for pain relief and respond immediately…
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 · D2026-03-19 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Number of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Medical Director (MD) or Nurse Practitioner (NP) were contacted for orders when two medications were unavailable for one resident (Resident #98) during medication pass. Specifically, this surveyor observed 2 of 37 opportunities for medication not administered in accordance with the physician orders by way of omission, resulting in a medication error rate of 5.41%. The findings include: Review of Resident #98's Medical Diagnosis revealed the facility admitted Resident #98 with diagnoses which included dementia, fibromyalgia (widespread chronic pain and fatigue) and polyneuropathy (widespread damage to peripheral nerves causing numbness, burning pain and weakness starting in the hands and feet). Review of an admission Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 12/10/2025, revealed Resident #98 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 5, which indicated 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 · Ecited before2025-01-24 · 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, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that the environment was clean and sanitary to provide a homelike environment on the secured unit. This failed practice had the potential to affect all 20 residents who resided in the secure unit. The findings are: A review of the facility policy Housekeeping Cleaning Guidelines indicated: a. Corridors and Public Areas: (including dining rooms, day rooms, lobby, activity areas, therapy areas etc.) Dust mopping, (including corners and edges) daily, damp/wet mop daily, scrubbing of resilient tile as scheduled. b. Corridors and Public Areas: (including dining rooms, day rooms, lobby, activity areas, therapy areas etc.) 3. Check/dust horizontal areas daily, 4. check/dust/clean vertical services daily, 16. Public area deep clean (light fixtures, vents, cubicle curtains/tracks, air/heat units, fire alarms, extinguishers, call lights/devices, baseboards, room corners, edges, ceiling corners etc.) monthly. c. Patient Room Cleaning: 3.…
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 before2025-01-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure infection control measures, including the storage of resident equipment, were implemented during residents smoking for 1 (Resident #1) of 1 sampled resident observed for prevention of potential infection and/or the spread of infections. The findings include: Review of a facility policy titled, Cleaning and Disinfection of Resident-Care items and Equipment dated September 2022, indicated, Resident-care equipment, including reusable items and durable medical equipment will be cleaned and disinfected according to current CDC recommendations for disinfection and the OSHA Bloodborne Pathogens Standard. A review of an admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #1 with diagnoses that included cerebral palsy and Parkinson's disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/07/2024, revealed Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 9 (08-12 indicates moderately impaired). Review of Resident #1's Care Plan initiated: 06/15/2015, 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-05 · 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 maintenance was in place to maintain and prevent broken and exposed wall plug outlets, broken trim on walls, holes in sheet rock, wall nail holes, and leaky toilet rims in resident rooms to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment in Hall 1 of eleven (11) Resident rooms. The findings are: On 01/02/2023, at 12:20 PM, environmental rounds were made in the facility rooms, the following were observed: a. Standing in the entrance of room eight (8), wall trim behind the headboard on the left, is located on the floor. In addition, the 4-plug wall outlet is separated from the sheetrock, exposing 1/2 inch across the top of the wall plate. A 2-plug wall outlet on the right side of the wall, is separated from the sheetrock exposing 1/2 inch across the top of the wall plate. b. Standing in the entrance of room ten (10), behind the entrance door, is a hole in the sheetrock approximately (12 x 12 cm [centimeters]). In addition, 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 · E2024-01-05 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were given within a timely manner to avoid adverse effects on resident's condition and ensure that medications were administrated without unnecessary interruptions, for 2 (Resident #7 and #44) sampled residents. This failed practice had the potential to affect 51 residents who were dependent on the nurses for medication administration. The findings are: 1. Resident #7 [R#7] had diagnosis Hemiplegia ( weakness or paralysis on one side of the body) and Hemiparesis ( weakness of one side of the body) following unspecified Cerebrovascular Disease affecting Left Non-Dominant side. a. On 01/02/24 at 12:11 p. m., R #7 stated, My night medications [meds] are always late, I get them around 11 p. m. I have filed a grievance because on 12/19/23 I didn't get them until 2:00 a.m. I don't think they are short-staffed; I think the nurses just don't do their jobs. b. Review of the grievance filed by R#7 on 12/19/23 documented .Nature of Grievance: didn't get her night times meds until 2 am . Resolution:…
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 · E2024-01-05 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — patternHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Surveyor: Young, [NAME] Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement program [QAPI] Committee developed and implemented appropriate plans of action to prevent repeated deficiencies with a maintenance program in place to prevent broken, exposed wall plug outlets, broken wall trim, holes in sheet rock, wall nail holes and leaky toilets in resident's rooms to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment. These failed practices had the potential to affect 51 residents who reside in the facility. The findings are: 1. A Recertification survey was conducted on 01/05/2024 at the facility. During this survey, the team identified concerns with food services, food storage, and hand hygiene when preparing and serving food in a sanitary manner and concerns with infection control. A. The Plan of Correction with a completion date of 10/22/2022 documented: This Plan of Correction is to be considered as an allegation of Compliance. Step #1: Corrective…
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 · D2023-10-06 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff did not leave medications unattended on a secured unit. The findings are: During observation on 10/4/23 at 11:16 AM, a resident was sitting in the day room at a table with two other residents on the secured unit. The resident had a cup of water and a medication cup with four pills on a table in front of her. There was a total of four residents in the day room. During interview on 10/4/23 at 11:27 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 came into the day room. The Surveyor asked LPN #1 should a cup of medications be on a table unsupervised with residents in the day room? LPN #1 said she gave the resident her morning medications and she does not how the medications got on the table. During interview on 10/4/23 at 11:32 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed a cup of medications should not have been left on a table in a secured unit unsupervised. Review on 10/4/23 at 3:18 PM of facility policy titled Administering Medications showed, medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner…
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.
- No harm found · B2026-03-19 · tag F0732 — patternPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Number of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on observation, record review, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure required nurse staffing information (staff, census, date and location) was consistently provided on the Daily Staffing Log, to ensure nurse staffing information was documented in a readable format for visitors and staff. The findings include: During observation and concurrent interview on 03/17/2026 at 3:07 PM, Human Resources [HR] provided Daily Staffing Logs from 02/15/2026-03/15/2026. This Surveyor observed the Daily Staffing Logs were missing dates, resident census, staff names and work locations on some of the logs. HR stated, The Daily Staffing Logs are hanging on a whiteboard opposite the time clock and facing the common entry area for visitors. HR stated that they were responsible for dating the staffing log, hanging it up, recording the census, and writing down the total work hours and that staff were responsible for writing their names and their location worked on the Daily Staffing Log. If anything gets left off,…
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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
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 77% 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 $1.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% 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
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 045297. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-19, 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.