THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
The Springs of Harrison has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is above average and recommended for families considering this facility. It ranks #46 out of 218 nursing homes in Arkansas, placing it in the top half, and #2 out of 3 in Boone County, indicating only one local option is better. The facility is improving, having reduced issues from 7 in 2024 to none in 2025, and it has not faced any fines, which is a positive sign. Staffing is rated average with a turnover rate of 52%, slightly above the state average, and the RN coverage is also average, meaning that while there is some consistency, improvements can be made. Specific concerns include inadequate food storage practices, such as failing to date several food items, which could pose a risk of foodborne illness for residents. Overall, while there are strengths like a high overall star rating, these food safety issues highlight areas for improvement that families should consider.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Arkansas
- #46/218
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 52% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Arkansas facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 24 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Arkansas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Arkansas avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 18 deficiencies on record
Aug 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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, records review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents, or their...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Deficiency Text Not Available
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
5 deficiencies
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure interventions were in place for a contracture for 1 (Resident #20) of 1 sampled resident.
The findings include:
Resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a safe, functional, sanitary, and homelike e...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers received care and treatment to prevent potential infection or deterioration and promote...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control measures, including hand hyg...
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
According to observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored properly, kitchen equipment was maintained properly, and disinfectant was in use for the dishwashe...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident medications were administered timely and per Physician's Orders and facility policy for 1 (Resident #117) of ...
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 resident fingernails were cleaned, trimmed and filed for 1 (Resident #23) of 24 (Residents #1, #4, #5, #9, #11, #13, #...
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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the call light systems were maintained to prevent accident hazards for 2 (Residents #14 and #41) sampled residents who...
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 that oxygen was administered at the ordered flow rate for 1 (Resident #21) of 7 (R #14, 15, 19, 21, 23, 34 and 42) samp...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0730
(Tag F0730)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, interview, the facility failed to ensure performance reviews were completed at least every 12 months to assist in the development of education needs, to include demonstrated co...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, 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 resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, and record review, facility failed to ensure pneumococcal immunizations were administered to eligible residents and immunization records were accurate for 4 (Residents #52, #54, #5...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0887
(Tag F0887)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure COVID-19 vaccinations were administered to eligible residents and the immunization records were accurate for 3 (Residents #51, #56 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0919
(Tag F0919)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the call systems in all areas were functioning properly for 2 (Residents #14 and #41) sampled residents whose call lig...
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 refrigerator, freezer, and dry storage areas were dated when received and/or opened to preven...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure baths/showers were regularly and consistently provided, to maintain good personal hygiene and prevent odors for 3 (Residents #1, #2 ...
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 B+ (85/100). 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.
- • 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is The Springs Of Harrison's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON 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 The Springs Of Harrison Staffed?
CMS rates THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 52%, compared to the Arkansas average of 46%. RN turnover specifically is 75%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at The Springs Of Harrison?
State health inspectors documented 18 deficiencies at THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON during 2022 to 2024. These included: 18 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates The Springs Of Harrison?
THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON 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 THE SPRINGS ARKANSAS, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 90 certified beds and approximately 53 residents (about 59% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in HARRISON, Arkansas.
How Does The Springs Of Harrison Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (52%) 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 The Springs Of Harrison?
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 The Springs Of Harrison Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON 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 The Springs Of Harrison Stick Around?
THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON has a staff turnover rate of 52%, which is 5 percentage points above the Arkansas average of 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 The Springs Of Harrison Ever Fined?
THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON 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 The Springs Of Harrison on Any Federal Watch List?
THE SPRINGS OF HARRISON 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.