NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Nightingale at Stonegate in Crossett, Arkansas, has earned an impressive Trust Grade of A, indicating it is an excellent facility and highly recommended. It ranks #26 out of 218 nursing homes in Arkansas, placing it in the top half, and is the best option among the two facilities in Ashley County. The facility is improving, with issues decreasing from 7 in 2024 to just 2 in 2025, and it boasts strong staffing ratings, with a 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 37%, which is better than the state average. There have been no fines reported, and the facility has more RN coverage than 97% of other Arkansas facilities, ensuring attentive care. However, there are some areas of concern. Recent inspections revealed that the facility failed to maintain a sanitary environment, with dirty shower chairs and inadequate cleaning practices affecting the residents' comfort. Additionally, there were issues with respecting residents' dignity and not adequately updating care plans for individuals with changing needs, which could lead to potential harm. Overall, while Nightingale at Stonegate shows many strengths, families should be aware of these weaknesses when considering it for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- A
- In Arkansas
- #26/218
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 37% turnover. Near Arkansas's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Arkansas facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 42 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Arkansas. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 12 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (37%)
11 points below Arkansas average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Arkansas avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 12 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure housekeeping and maintenance ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to post the resident census on a daily basis.
A review of a Daily Staffing Log dated 07/23/2025 revealed the census was not provided or posted...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident and or resident representative and the Office of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident and/or resident representative was provided a cop...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure nail care was consistently provided to promote good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (Resident #54) of 1 sampled res...
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, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that staff used proper hand hygiene when assisting residents during meal service to prevent spread of bacteria, viruses...
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, interview and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity, and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maint...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure care plans were reviewed and revised at least quarterly and/...
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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure food items stored in the refrigerator and freezer were covered, sealed and dated to minimize the potential for food borne illness for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
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 the admission Evaluation accurately assessed 1...
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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #12) of 2 (Residents #12 and #100) sampled residents who smoked as documented on a list provided by the Di...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure 300 Hall medication cart was locked when out of the nurse's line of vision to keep medications and biologicals securely stored and to...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Grade A (90/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Arkansas.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Arkansas facilities.
- • 37% turnover. Below Arkansas's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 12 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Nightingale At Stonegate's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Arkansas, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Nightingale At Stonegate Staffed?
CMS rates NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 37%, compared to the Arkansas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Nightingale At Stonegate?
State health inspectors documented 12 deficiencies at NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE during 2023 to 2025. These included: 11 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Nightingale At Stonegate?
NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE 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 NIGHTINGALE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 56 certified beds and approximately 55 residents (about 98% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in CROSSETT, Arkansas.
How Does Nightingale At Stonegate Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (37%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Nightingale At Stonegate?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Nightingale At Stonegate Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE 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 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 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 Nightingale At Stonegate Stick Around?
NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE has a staff turnover rate of 37%, which is about average for Arkansas nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Nightingale At Stonegate Ever Fined?
NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Nightingale At Stonegate on Any Federal Watch List?
NIGHTINGALE AT STONEGATE 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.