GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Gassville Therapy and Living has a Trust Grade of C+, which means it is slightly above average but still has room for improvement. It ranks #105 out of 218 facilities in Arkansas, placing it in the top half, but it is #3 out of 4 in Baxter County, indicating only one local option is better. The facility is on an improving trend, with issues decreasing from 16 in 2023 to 10 in 2024. Staffing is a strength with a 4/5 star rating and a turnover rate of just 39%, significantly lower than the state average, which suggests a stable team that knows the residents well. On the downside, there are concerns related to food safety; recent inspections found issues like failure to wash hands between tasks, and food items not being dated or covered properly, posing a potential risk for foodborne illness. However, the facility has not incurred any fines, which is a positive sign. Additionally, it boasts better RN coverage than 94% of Arkansas facilities, ensuring that registered nurses can address health issues that might be overlooked by other staff.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Arkansas
- #105/218
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 39% 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 ○ Average
- Each resident gets 39 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Arkansas. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 31 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 (39%)
9 points below Arkansas average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Arkansas average (3.1)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near Arkansas avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 31 deficiencies on record
Nov 2024
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
Deficiency F0557
(Tag F0557)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure dignity while resident (#3) removed dental appliances (dentures), leaving them on the bedside...
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 F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to promote a healthy, comfortable environment by allowing residents to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
7 deficiencies
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
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents with concerns and complaints regarding call light answering times in the facility were able to have their grievances thoro...
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, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure residents who required assistance with activities of daily living were regularly provided with the necessary assistance...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure that pureed food was processed to the correct consistency to meet the needs one (Resident #9) of one sampled resident. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure items were dated and labeled in the walk-in refrigerator, expired items were discarded, and cross contamination of food...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to revise the care plan to have a securement device intervention in place for a catheter for 2 (Resident #9, #25) out of 2 sample...
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, and interview, the facility left an extra treatment cart unlocked and the whirlpool next t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to have a securement device in place for a catheter for 2 out of 2 sampled residents.
A review of the Order Summary reveals that...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that hands were washed between clean and dirty tasks to minimize the risk of cross contamination and foods were dated when received or...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 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
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the plan of care was revised to reflect the current needs of new fall interventions for 2 (Resident #3 and #4) of 4 sample mix resid...
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments were completed for 3 (Resident #1, #3, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2023
3 deficiencies
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 F0557
(Tag F0557)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents who required assistance to eat, were assisted in a manner to maintain dignity and respect for 1 (Reside...
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate care to include obtaining a physician treatment order and dating a wound dressing for 1 (Resident #3) of ...
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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the food items in the refrigerators were properly sealed, labeled or dated, and were disposed of in a timely manner to...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
11 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0552
(Tag F0552)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to make treatment decisions and physician and therapy evaluations were provided for 1 (Residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #3) was screened for a mental disorder or intellectual disability prior to admission, and failed to notify the state ag...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0660
(Tag F0660)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided the option, upon admission, to receive information regarding services for assistance in the community for 1...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure evaluations were conducted for therapy or restorative services for 1 (Resident #44) of 3 (Residents #3, #31 and #44) s...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure oxygen supplies were properly stored to prevent contamination while not in use for 1 (Resident # 27) of 3 (Residents #...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0741
(Tag F0741)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Special Care Neighborhood/Secure Unit had sufficient and competent staffing to ensure resident safety, resident ri...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure pureed food items were blended to a smooth, pudding like consistency to minimize the risk of choking or other complica...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Care Plans were developed for appropriate respiratory therapy interventions for 1 (Resident #27) sampled resident who resided in th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate direct care staff coverage to properly supervise and provide care for residents to prevent accidents, injury...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff washed and/or sanitized their hands during meal service on the Special Care Neighborhood , Secure Unit to preven...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food items stored in the refrigerators, freezers, and dry storage area were covered, sealed, and dated when received a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2022
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a bedside commode was promptly emptied and cleaned to provide a clean, homelike environment and prevent potential odors...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure to a resident was regularly assisted with bathing, hair grooming and clothing changes as per the plan of care to mainta...
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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was consistently administered at the flow rate ordered by the physician to minimize the potential for hypoxia o...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure prescribed medication was on hand to prevent a delay in administering medication for 1 (Resident #36) of 1 resident who ...
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
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the ice machine, walls, floors, utensil drawers and cabinets were maintained in clean condition to prevent potential food borne illnes...
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
- • 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.
- • 39% turnover. Below Arkansas's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 31 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Gassville Therapy And Living's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING 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 Gassville Therapy And Living Staffed?
CMS rates GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 39%, compared to the Arkansas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Gassville Therapy And Living?
State health inspectors documented 31 deficiencies at GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING during 2022 to 2024. These included: 31 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Gassville Therapy And Living?
GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING 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 42 certified beds and approximately 44 residents (about 105% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in GASSVILLE, Arkansas.
How Does Gassville Therapy And Living Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (39%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Gassville Therapy And Living?
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 Gassville Therapy And Living Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING 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 Gassville Therapy And Living Stick Around?
GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING has a staff turnover rate of 39%, 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 Gassville Therapy And Living Ever Fined?
GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING 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 Gassville Therapy And Living on Any Federal Watch List?
GASSVILLE THERAPY AND LIVING 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.