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

Perry County Nursing And Rehabilitation Center

1321 Scenic Drive, Perryville, AR 72126 · For profit - Individual · 95 certified beds · (501) 889-2400 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (501) 889-2400 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 10 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

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
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • about 17% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2 Hospital Dr · (501) 354-1190 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
214-216 Aplin St · (501) 889-5111 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
112 Houston Ave · (501) 889-2341 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 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 improved from 4 to 5 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 rating5★
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 increased10.9%9.5%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.0%4.3%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.3%0.6%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%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 restrained0.9%0.1%0.1%worse
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.9%3.9%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened15.0%10.1%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication31.5%21.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.2%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.6%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control20.9%13.5%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.2%10.9%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.9%1.3%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine71.7%77.7%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission19.4%24.1%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.6%12.5%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.282.011.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.072.131.80better

* 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.

51.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 62 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

51.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
29.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.08U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.04hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
<0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 29.6% 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 44 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 0.08 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 4% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% 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 SNF51.2%CMS range 41.2–62.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.0%CMS range 6.1–14.210.7%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 discharge29.6%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 discharge27.3%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 discharge29.6%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 identified91.9%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 setting100.0%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 worsened1.6%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 hospitalization6.2%CMS range 3.3–9.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.971.02Oct 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

0.22
RN hours/ resident / day
1.07
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.30
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.59
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.16
RN hoursweekends
46.3%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 95 beds and averages 68.6 residents a day — about 72% occupied, or roughly 26 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 4.59 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 3.30 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 4.97 on weekdays — 27% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.24 to 0.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% 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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-19)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-05)

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 · D2026-03-19 · 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 observations, interviews, record review and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for one (Resident #58) of five residents reviewed for comprehensive person center care plans. The findings include: Review of an admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #58 on 09/25/2025 with diagnoses that included degeneration of the brain, dementia with mood disturbances, depression, anxiety, wandering and repeated falls. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/02/2026, revealed Resident #58 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 4 which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment and was severely impaired for daily decision making. The MDS indicated Resident #58 was dependent on supervision of staff and touch assistance to walk 10 feet, to walk 50 feet with two turns and to walk 150 feet. Position changes from sitting to lying, lying or sitting on the side of the bed was supervision and touch…

    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 · Fcited before2024-09-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure employees washed their hands between handling dirty equipment and clean equipment, food items stored on the freezer were covered or sealed to prevent the potential for foodborne illnesses, and hot food items were maintained of 135 degrees Fahrenheit or above on the steam table while awaiting service to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen. The findings are: 1. On 9/3/24 at 9:20 AM, Dietary [NAME] (DC) #1 removed a bottle of coke and a glass containing coke from the counter and placed them on the window bar, contaminating her hands. DC #1 removed her gloves from the glove box and placed them on her hands, contaminating the gloves in the process. Without changing gloves and washing her hands. DC #1 then picked up a cucumber from the counter and peeled it. The cucumber slices were placed on top of the salad to be served to the residents who requested salad with their meals. 2. On 9/3/24 at 9:35 AM, the following…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-05 · 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 — the official record, unedited, 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 that nutritionally balanced meals were provided for the residents for 1 of 1 meal observed. The findings are. 1. On 9/3/24 the noon meal menu indicated all residents on mechanical soft diets were to receive 2 ounces of gravy and for pureed diets, 2 ounces of gravy and one #10 (equivalent to 3 ounces) scoop of pureed bread. 2. On 9/3/24 at 12:23 PM, the residents on pureed diets were not served cornbread or regular bread. There were no substitutes served to the residents in place of bread. 3. On 9/3/24 at 12:50 PM, the residents on mechanical soft diets were not served gravy. 4. On 9/3/2024 at 1:06 PM, during an interview Dietary [NAME] (DC) #1 was asked about the texture of the pureed bread prepared to serve to the residents on pureed diets. DC #1 stated it looked like a dough ball when prepared, so it was not served to the residents. DC #1 confirmed she made gravy but forgot to serve it.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-09-05 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure pureed food items were blended to a smooth, lump free consistency to minimize the risk of choking or other complications for those residents who required pureed diets for 1 of 1 meal observed. The findings are: 1. On 9/03/24 at 11:50 AM, Dietary [NAME] (DC) #3 placed 6 servings of breaded fried pork chops into a blender, added a carton of whole milk and pureed. At 11:52 AM, DC #3 scraped pureed pork chops into a pan, covered the pan with foil and placed it in the oven. The consistency of the pureed fried chops was more of a ground texture and thick. 2. On 9/3/24 at 11:09 AM, DC #3 used a #8 scoop (1/2 cup) to portion 6 servings of turnip greens into a blender and pureed. At 11:11 AM, DC #3 poured the pureed greens into a pan, covered the pan with foil and placed it in the oven. The consistency of the pureed turnip greens was thick. 3. On 9/3/24 at 11:23 AM, DC #3 used a #8 scoop to portion 6 servings of black-eyed peas into a blender, added a carton of whole milk 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 residents on the Dementia Unit were supervised at all times to prevent accidents and hazards for 1 (Resident #50) sampled resident. Findings are: On 9/3/2024 at 12:18 PM, Resident #50 was in the Observation Hall (a locked unit for residents with dementia) Dining Room sitting in a mobility device. Resident #50 self-propelled up to the trash can, located along the outside wall, lifted the lid and reached in with both hands. Resident #50 closed the lid and self-propelled out of the dining room. Staff was not in dining room during this time. On 9/3/2024 at 12:58 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #4 left seven dementia residents to eat in the Observation Hall Dining Room unattended (drink and meals were in front of residents). CNA #4 went to get an alternative meal for a resident. CNA #4 was gone from the dining room between 12:58 PM to 1:06 PM. On 9/5/2024 at 8:45 AM, CNA #4 stated it was unsanitary for Resident #50 to place both arms in the trash bin. You don't want the resident to pick anything up…

    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 · Fcited before2023-07-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure foods stored in the storage area, freezer, and refrigerator were covered, sealed and dated to minimize the potential for food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen; and expired food items were promptly removed from stock to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meal trays from I of I kitchen; dietary staff washed their hands and changed gloves before handling food items to prevent the potential for cross contamination for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen. and hot food items on the steamtable were maintained at a temperature at or above 135 degrees Fahrenheit while awaiting service, to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen. These failed practices had the potential to affect 52 residents who received meals from the Kitchen (Total Census: 54), according to the list provided by the Dietary Supervisor on 07/17/2023 PM The findings are: 1. On 07/16/23 at 10:28 AM An opened bag of bread…

    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 · E2023-07-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure medication was stored in a safe manner and failed to ensure expired medications were removed from one of one medication rooms, to prevent potential administration of an expired medication to a resident. The failed practices had the potential to affect all 54 residents who reside in the facility. The findings are: 1. On 07/11/2023 at 10:39 AM observed Resident #25 in a recliner in their room. On the over bed table, within reach of the resident, were two medications with the resident's name on the label. One was a Breo Ellipta Inhaler the other was an Ipratropium Bromide Solution nasal spray. Resident #25 stated, I am supposed to take it back to her (meaning the nurse) after I give it to myself. I always do it that way. a. On 07/16/2023 at 10:40 AM interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 who stated, she left the inhaler in the room, and stated he thought the resident had a self-administration assessment. b. Review of the policy, Medication, Self-Administration of, last updated on 5/1/15 noted, .storage 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-07-20 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure meals were prepared and served according to the planned written menu to meet the nutritional needs of the residents for 1 of 1 meal observed. This failed practice had the potential to affect 44 residents who received regular diets,10 residents who received mechanical soft diets, and 8 residents who received pureed diets from the kitchen according to a list provided by the Assistant Dietary Supervisor on 07/16/2023. The findings are: 1. The facility menu for lunch provided by the Assistant Dietary Supervisor on 07/16/23 at 1:37 PM, noted each resident who received regular diets were to receive 4 ounces of fried chicken, each resident on mechanical soft were to receive 4 ounces of ground fried chicken and each resident on pureed diets were to receive a #8 scoop (4-ounces) of pureed fried chicken. 2. The following observations were made during the noon meal preparation and meal observation. a. On 07/16/23 at 10:59 AM Dietary Employee (DE) #1 used a #16 (Blue) scoop (2 ounce) to place 18 servings 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-20 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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 prevent a resident from self-administering medications without being assessed for self-administration of medication for 1 (resident #25) of 15 sampled residents. On 07/11/2023 at 10:39 AM observed Resident #25 in a recliner in their room. On the over bed table, within reach of the resident, were two medications with the resident's name on the label. One was a Breo Ellipta Inhaler the other was an Ipratropium Bromide Solution nasal spray. Resident #25 stated, I am supposed to take it back to her (meaning the nurse) after I give it to myself. I always do it that way. Review of the physician orders dated 08/09/2022 revealed an order for Breo Ellipta Aerosol Powder inhalation one time a day and Ipratropium Bromide Solution nasal spray two times a day. There was no order for the resident to self-administer the medications. A review of Resident #25 medical record failed to reveal a medication self-administration assessment. A review of Resident #25 care plan revealed a care plan for allergies, last updated on…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-20 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow the physicians order to change oxygen tubing for 1 (resident #32) of eight (Resident #2, #4, #13, #25, #26, #32, #39, and #41) sampled residents who received supplemental oxygen. The findings are: On 07/16/2023 at 11:02 AM observed Resident #32 lying in bed with oxygen in place. An oxygen concentrator was at the bedside, with a humidifier bottle and oxygen tubing connected both were dated 07/06/23. Review of the physician orders dated 06/21/2023 noted, change oxygen tubing, clean filter and oxygen cabinet, date all tubing every Thursday on the 7 am-7 pm shift. On 07/18/2023 at 2:20 PM the surveyor asked Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #4 who is responsible for taking care of the residents' oxygen, who is responsible for changing the oxygen tubing and when is it changed? LPN #4 stated the nurses monitor the oxygen, and the treatment nurse changes the tubing every Thursday. On 07/18/2023 at 2:30 PM the surveyor asked LPN #3 who is responsible for taking care of the residents' oxygen, who is responsible for…

    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.

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

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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.6+1.4 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.2+1.8 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.2-0.2 vs chain
The other 37 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
1 of 5Alma Nursing and RehabAlma, AR 1 of 5Jamestown Nursing And Rehab, LLCRogers, AR 2 of 5Apple Creek Health And Rehab, LLCCenterton, AR 2 of 5Belvedere Nursing And Rehabilitation Center, LLCHot Springs, AR 2 of 5Colonel Glenn Health And Rehab, LLCLittle Rock, AR 2 of 5Highlands Of Bella Vista Health & Rehab, LLCBella Vista, AR 2 of 5Innisfree Health And Rehab, LLCRogers, AR 2 of 5Robinson Nursing And Rehabilitation Center LLCNorth Little Rock, AR 3 of 5Aspen Health and RehabBroken Arrow, OK 3 of 5Bradford House Nursing and Rehab, LLCBentonville, AR 3 of 5Briarwood Nursing And Rehabilitation Center, INCLittle Rock, AR 3 of 5Brooken Hill Health And Rehab, LlcFort Smith, AR 3 of 5Eufaula Manor Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterEufaula, OK 3 of 5Hickory Heights Health And Rehab, LlcLittle Rock, AR 3 of 5Lake Hamilton Health And RehabHot Springs, AR 3 of 5Quapaw Care And Rehabilitation Center LLCHot Springs, AR 3 of 5Russellville Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterRussellville, AR 3 of 5Sherwood Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, IncSherwood, AR 4 of 5Ashton Place Health And Rehab, LLCBarling, AR 4 of 5Cabot Health And Rehab, LLCCabot, AR 4 of 5Chapel Ridge Health And RehabFort Smith, AR 4 of 5Cherokee County Nursing CenterTahlequah, OK 4 of 5Dardanelle Nursing And Rehabilitation Center,incDardanelle, AR 4 of 5Heather Manor Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterHope, AR 4 of 5Johnson County Health And Rehab, LLCClarksville, AR 4 of 5Lakewood Health And Rehab, LLCNorth Little Rock, AR 5 of 5Atkins Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterAtkins, AR 5 of 5Greenbrier Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterGreenbrier, AR 5 of 5Greystone Nursing And Rehab, LLCCabot, AR 5 of 5Hampton Place Healthcare, LLCRogers, AR 5 of 5Legacy Heights Nursing And Rehab, LLCRussellville, AR 5 of 5Lonoke Health And Rehab Center, LLCLonoke, AR 5 of 5Nursing And Rehabilitation Center At Good ShepherdLittle Rock, AR 5 of 5Oak Manor Nursing And Rehabilitation Center INCBooneville, AR 5 of 5Salem Place Nursing And Rehabilitation Center, INCConway, AR 5 of 5Shiloh Nursing And Rehab, LLCSpringdale, AR 5 of 5Superior Health & Rehab, LLCConway, AR

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
MORTON, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/09/2004
SAMS, JERRYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2007
TILLEY, JAMESIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/10/2024
CENTRAL ARKANSAS NURSING CENTERS INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
NURSING CONSULTANTS INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
PERRY COUNTY NURSING CENTEROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/12/2024
STOUT, RHONDAIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 12/10/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 7 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.

$7.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+17.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.0M
Related-party expense17% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 67%Medicare 10%Other / private 23%

This home reported $1.0M 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

$287per resident / day
operating cost
$8,727per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$349per 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 045246. 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.

What to do next