ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Alcoa Pines Health and Rehabilitation has received a Trust Grade of D, indicating below average quality and some significant concerns. They rank #98 out of 218 facilities in Arkansas, placing them in the top half of the state, but they are #4 out of 6 in Saline County, meaning only one local option is better. The facility's performance is improving, with the number of issues decreasing from 9 in 2024 to 3 in 2025, but staffing remains a concern as they have a turnover rate of 74%, well above the state average of 50%. They have incurred $10,693 in fines, which is average, but specific incidents raise alarms; for instance, a resident was transferred by one staff member when the care plan required two, and dietary staff repeatedly failed to wash their hands before handling food, risking the health of residents. While the facility has average RN coverage, these ongoing issues highlight areas needing immediate attention.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Arkansas
- #98/218
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 74% turnover. Very high, 26 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $10,693 in fines. Higher than 73% of Arkansas facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 23 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Arkansas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 25 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Near Arkansas average (3.1)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
27pts above Arkansas avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
26 points above Arkansas average of 48%
The Ugly 25 deficiencies on record
May 2025
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a physician's order for oxygen was in place before administering oxygen to 1 (Resident #59) ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate handling and placement, to prevent possible contamination and complications, from...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff washed their hands between dirty and clean tasks, and before handling clean equipment for 1 of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to update the resident care plan to reflect a diagnosis ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a wander management device was in place to decrease the potential for elopement and safety hazards for 1 (Resident #35...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure expired medication was removed from a medicati...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an Antibiotic Stewardship Program was consistently implemented, as evidenced by an antibiotic was prescribed without a duration or e...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from accidents and hazards by leaving the storage room door unsecured allowing residents access to...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide maintenance to oxygen equipment in accordance with the facility policy for 1 (Resident #29) of 12 sampled residents w...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a psychotropic medication, used on an as needed (PRN) basis for more than 14 days, had a duration for the order, to promote or maint...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure meals were served in a method that maintained the appearance of cold product and at temperatures that were acceptable ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Surveyor: [NAME], [NAME]
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff washed their hands befo...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
2 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure two staff members were present when transferring a resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0602
(Tag F0602)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure personal funds were not misappropriated, for 3 (Resident #4, #5, #6) sampled residents with money held in a trust fund by the facilit...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1(Resident #2) of 2 (#2, and #3) sampled residents received their scheduled shower or bath. The findings are:
a. On 05/15/23 at 9:34...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure nebulizer masks and tubing were contained when not in use to prevent the potential spread of infection and infectious ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented universal source control by wearing face masks in the facility when the county transmission rate w...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to sure 1 (Resident #2) of 3 (Resident #1, R #2, R #3) sampled residents that depended on the staff to assist them with a shower were showered...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide in writing the reason for the resident's transfer or discharge to the hospital in a manner that was understandable for the resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure lunch was served at the same time for all Residents sitting at the same table to promote dignity and respect for 3 of 3 meals observed...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to provide services necessary to maintain a sanitary, or...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, record review the facility failed to ensure that sharps containers were monitored and emptied when full to prevent possible injury to residents. This practice had the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, observation and record review the facility failed to assure that all nursing staff possessed the competencies and skill sets necessary to provide nursing and related services to me...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation of the 8:00 a.m. medication pass on 1/18/23, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of 5% [percent] or less. The facility had 4 medica...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Medication Administration
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that an ice scoop was kept clean to prevent any cross contamination between residents and that staff members...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • 25 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $10,693 in fines. Above average for Arkansas. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade D (43/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 74% turnover. Very high, 26 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
About This Facility
What is Alcoa Pines's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Arkansas, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Alcoa Pines Staffed?
CMS rates ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 74%, which is 27 percentage points above the Arkansas average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at Alcoa Pines?
State health inspectors documented 25 deficiencies at ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 24 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Alcoa Pines?
ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by ANTHONY & BRYAN ADAMS, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 90 residents (about 75% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in BENTON, Arkansas.
How Does Alcoa Pines Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (74%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Alcoa Pines?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's high staff turnover rate and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Alcoa Pines Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Arkansas. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Alcoa Pines Stick Around?
Staff turnover at ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION is high. At 74%, the facility is 27 percentage points above the Arkansas average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Alcoa Pines Ever Fined?
ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION has been fined $10,693 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Arkansas average of $33,186. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Alcoa Pines on Any Federal Watch List?
ALCOA PINES HEALTH AND REHABILITATION is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.