Edgewood Health And Rehab
1393 E Don Tyson Parkway, Springdale, AR 72764 · For profit - Corporation · 100 certified beds · (479) 751-2390 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — 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
- about 25% 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 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 fell from 5 to 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 | 5.6% | 9.5% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.7% | 4.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 1.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.1% | 3.9% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.1% | 10.1% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 6.4% | 21.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.3% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.3% | 13.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.1% | 10.9% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.6% | 77.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.9% | 24.1% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.9% | 12.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.46 | 2.01 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.10 | 2.13 | 1.80 | better |
* 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.
48.3% 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 94 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 72.1% 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 61 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 21% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 | 48.3%CMS range 39.0–57.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.8%CMS range 7.1–15.7 | 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 | 72.1% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 44.3% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 65.6% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 97.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.9% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.6%CMS range 3.5–11.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.93 | 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 100 beds and averages 78.0 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 22 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 4.43 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.00 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 3.80 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.68 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.30 to 0.19 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · E2024-11-07 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and document reviews, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) worked at least 8 consecutive hours a day, for 7 days a week, and the Director of Nursing (DON) did not serve as the RN in the facility. This failed practice had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 84. Findings included: A review of an undated document, titled Job Description Charge Nurse/Shift Supervisor, revealed the primary purpose of the position was to direct nursing care that included: participation in surveys, admit, transfer, and discharge residents, administering medications, arranging diagnostic services, consulting with physician for resident care and treatment, ensuring resident treatments are performed, evaluate residents physical and emotional status, provide catheterization, tube feedings, dressing application/changes, massages, range of motion exercises, obtaining lab specimens, and checking residents, unable to utilize the call light, frequently, and supervise nursing activities performed by nursing…
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 before2024-11-07 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene during meal service. Specifically, staff failed to perform hand hygiene between serving resident trays, prior to entering or leaving resident rooms on 1 (300) hall of 1 hall observed during meal service; and failed to ensure hand hygiene was performed during perineal care with a brief change for 1 (Resident #12) of 21 sampled residents. The facility also failed to initiate Enhanced Barrier Precaution (EBP) for 1 (Resident #34) of 1 resident reviewed for enhanced barrier precautions. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Handwashing/Hand Hygiene, revised 10/2023 revealed, the facility trained and expected all employees to follow the policy on hand hygiene, as the facility considered hand hygiene the primary means of preventing the spread of healthcare-associated infections. Hand hygiene was to be performed, c. after contact with . body fluids .d. after touching a resident;…
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 · Fcited before2023-09-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff effectively washed their hands before handling clean equipment or food items to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen, These failed practices had the potential to affect 78 residents who received meals from the kitchen. The findings included: The following observations were made during the supper meal on 09/06/2023. a. Dietary Employee (DE) # 1 at 4:11 PM, removed a can of cream of chicken soup from the storage room and placed it on the counter. She picked up a pan from below the food preparation counter and placed it on the counter. She turned on the sink faucet and rinsed the pan and placed the pan on the counter with her fingers inside the pan. b. At 4:13 PM, DE #1 opened a can of cream of chicken soup and emptied it into a contaminated pan and placed it on the stove. She placed chicken into a pot and started to cook. c. Dietary Employee #2 at 4:15 PM, was holding a box of gloves with his bare hand removed the gloves from the box and placed his hands…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-08 · 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
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a sanitary environment for 79 residents and failed to ensure furnishings were free of tears to promote a homelike environment affecting 15 residents residing in the 100 unit. Findings included: A. During observation of the nurses' station on 09/07/2023 at 9:56 AM the wall guard had a layer of dust resting on top. B. During observation of Unit 100 on 09/06/2023 at 2:28 PM, a blue chair in the common area outside the nurses' station had a tear approximately 7 x 2.5 with cream colored foam exposed. The foam area had a hole in the middle and appeared picked apart. C. During interview on 09/07/2023 at 9:18 AM CNA #1 said, residents stick tissues into the hole that is in the blue chair. D. During interview on 09/07/2023 at 9:28 AM, the Surveyor asked Maintenance Director who is responsible for the furnishings, and is it appropriate to use chairs that are ripped with stuffing exposed? The Maintenance Director said he is responsible for furnishings, and it does not make for a homelike appearance. E. During interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 that insulin bottles were dated after opening. The failed practice had the potential to effect 13 residents with orders to receive insulin, and the facility failed to ensure the refrigerated narcotic medications were stored in a permanently affixed container, and locked, to prevent the potential of misappropriation of resident property affecting 79 residents. The findings included: On 09/07/2023 at 7:40 AM the Surveyor observed LPN #1during medication pass on Hall 100. An open bottle of Glargine Insulin was unlabeled and undated. The Surveyor asked LPN #1 is it standard practice to label a new insulin bottle with the open date? LPN#1 stated, They are supposed to be, but she is a fairly new admit. During interview on 09/07/2023 at 11:47 AM, the Surveyor asked the Director of Nursing (DON) should insulin be dated when opened? The DON said, yes in order to discard the bottle within 28 days. Observation of the medication storage room on 09/07/2023 at 3:15 PM showed the following: a. One open bottle of Levemir Insulin…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-08 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure personal medical information and privacy was protected for 1of 1 Resident (Resident #279) during medication administration. This failed practice had the potential to affect 19 Residents on Hall 300 receiving medications. The findings included: During the morning medication pass on 09/07/2023 at 7:40 AM, the Surveyor observed LPN#1 leave Resident #279's empty medication blister pack on top of the medication cart with Resident #279's name and medication information visible to anyone in 300 hall. During interview on 09/07/2023 at 7:45 AM LPN#1 said, she forgot and left the empty medication pack on the cart visible, and confirmed there was personal information of Resident #279's on the pack. On 09/07/23 at 11:47 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed medication cards with resident information should not be left unattended and visible on the medication cart. Review of facility's policy titled Computer Terminals/Workstations on 09/08/2023 at 11:50 AM provided by the Nurse Consultant showed, Printed information that…
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 before2023-09-08 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate infection control measures were implemented during medication administration to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 1 blood glucose observation. The following observations and interviews were made on 09/07/2023 of (Licensed Practical Nurse) LPN #1 during the morning medication pass. a. On 09/07/2023 at 7:39 AM LPN#1 came out of a resident's room with gloved hands that were worn while checking a resident's blood glucose level. LPN#1 pulled the handle on the bottom drawer of the medication cart wearing the same gloves. LPN#1 then pulled the glove off his right hand, laid it on top of the medication cart, and proceeded to open the drawer where insulin was stored. The Surveyor asked LPN#1 if there was an issue with trying to open the medication cart drawer with the same gloves worn for checking glucose. The LPN#1 stated, You don't want to transfer any germs. I'm sorry you caught me off guard. During interview on 09/07/2023 at 11:47 AM,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-06-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure foods stored in the refrigerators, freezer, and dry storage room were dated and failed to ensure foods stored in the freezer were sealed to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen. These failed practices had the potential to affect 71 residents (total census 73) who received meals from the kitchen as documented on a list provided by the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/09/22 at 1:35 PM. The findings are: 1. On 06/06/22 at 9:22 AM, during the initial tour of the kitchen with the Registered Dietician (RD) and the Dietary Manager (DM) the following observations were made: a. At 9:57 AM, in the Walk-In freezer there was a box of Vanilla Ice Cream Sandwiches not dated. The RD could not find the box they came out of. She stated she would throw them away. The RD guessed there was 15-20 Ice Cream sandwiches in the box. An open bag of breaded chicken fillets was not sealed. Whitish gray crystals had formed on the fillets. The RD stated they will throw them out.…
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 · E2022-06-10 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — patternEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
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 assistance with meals was provided to meet the needs of the residents to improve, maintain or prevent a decline in their eating abilities for 1 (Resident #56) of 2 (Residents #56 and 176) of sampled residents who required their food to be cut up and failed to ensure one on one assistance with eating was provided for 1 (Resident #57) of 1 sampled resident who had physician orders for one on one meal assistance. The findings are: 1. Resident #56 had diagnoses of Dementia, Hemiplegia, Chronic Pain, Osteoporosis Unspecified Cerebral Infarction, Muscle wasting and Atrophy Multiple Sites. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 5/10/22 documented the resident scored 14 (13-15 indicates cognitively intact) on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and required supervision with set up only for eating. a. A current physician's orders documented, Regular-Enhanced diet Regular texture, regular consistency . b. The Care Plan with a revision date of 5/17/22 documented, 1:1…
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 · E2022-06-10 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure 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 observation, record review and interview, 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 residents who required pureed diets for 1 of 1 meal observed. The failed practice had the potential to affect 4 residents who received pureed diets as documented on a list received from the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/09/22 at 1:32 PM. The findings are: 1. On 06/07/22 at 11:12 AM, Dietary Employee (DE) #1 pureed beef patties and emptied the food processor contents into a metal steam table pan and covered the pan with plastic wrap and placed it on steam table. The Surveyor took a spoonful of the pureed beef patties and felt texture with her fingers. There were pieces of hard fat, 1/2 the size of a pea throughout the spoonful of pureed beef patties. The Registered Dietician (RD) felt the fat balls and stated the beef patties, pork, and sausage were difficult to puree. 2. The RD informed DE #1 to puree the meat more and add two slices of bread per the recipe to make a smooth…
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 · D2022-06-10 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurate to facilitate the ability to plan and provide necessary care and services for 3 (Resident #25, 69 and 70) of 11 (Residents #14, 69, 55, 13, 51, 25, 70, 72, 56, 49 and 38) sampled residents who received Plavix, and failed to ensure accurate completion of the MDS related to a significant change in condition for 1 (Resident #42) of 13 (Residents #14, 75, 39, 32, 71, 59, 50, 77, 62, 6, 43, 42 and 13) sampled residents who were hospitalized , admitted or discharged from Hospice Services or had a decline in care areas the last 120 days. These failed practices had the potential to affect 14 residents with Physician Orders for Plavix according to list provided by the Director of Nursing (DON) on 6/8/22 at 3:20 PM and 34 residents who were hospitalized , admitted , or discharged from Hospice services or who had a decline in care areas the last 120 days according to a list provided by the MDS…
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 · D2022-06-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive person centered plan of care addressed the medical and nursing needs related to the administration of an anticoagulant medication to alert staff of the necessary care and monitoring to minimize the potential for complications for 1 (Resident #36) of 9 (Residents #36, 55, 51, 19, 34, 226, 59, 176 and 67) sampled residents who had physician orders for an anticoagulant medication. The findings are: 1. Resident #36 had diagnoses of Hypertension, Personal History of Pulmonary Embolism and Thrombosis and Embolism. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/18/22 documented the resident scored 13 (13-15 indicates cognitively intact) on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and received an anticoagulant 7 days of the 7 day look back period. a. The Physician's Order dated 10/18/21 documented, Eliquis Tablet 5 MG (Apixaban) Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to Personal History of Other Venous Thrombosis and Embolism . b. On 06/09/22 at 9:47 AM, the MDS…
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ANTHONY & BRYAN ADAMS — 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 5 of 5 | 3.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 3.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 37 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, per CMS)
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OVATION HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 04/09/2019 |
| CENTENNIAL BANK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2019 |
| JACK, NACOLE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2021 |
| JONES, TRACIE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/11/2021 |
| THOMAS, DARRYL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2019 |
| ADAMS, ANTHONY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/09/2019 |
| ADAMS, BRYAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/09/2019 |
| ELLIS, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2004 |
| KOEHLER, TOBEY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/05/2002 |
| 3B HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2019 |
| HOME BANCSHARES | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2019 |
| LTC SYSTEMS/RX, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2019 |
| PHARMACY CONSULTS, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2019 |
| RELIANCE HEALTH CARE, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2019 |
| SP EAST RE, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2019 |
| BURNER, KIMBERLY | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/28/2024 |
| MCGINNIS, LARRY | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 17 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 25% 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 045428. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-11-07, 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.