THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
The Springs of Greers Ferry has a Trust Grade of C, which means it is average compared to other facilities. It ranks #177 out of 218 in Arkansas, placing it in the bottom half of the state's nursing homes, and #2 out of 2 in Cleburne County, indicating that only one local option is available. The facility is showing an improving trend, with the number of issues found decreasing from 12 in 2023 to 6 in 2024. Staffing is rated average with a turnover rate of 51%, which is around the state average. Although there have been no fines recorded, the facility has had concerning inspection findings, including failures to maintain kitchen cleanliness and proper food storage, which could pose health risks to residents. Overall, while there are some strengths such as an improving trend and no fines, the facility still has significant weaknesses that families should consider.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Arkansas
- #177/218
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 51% 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 20 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Arkansas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 30 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
Below Arkansas average (3.1)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
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 30 deficiencies on record
Aug 2024
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the menu card was followed to accommodate one (Resident #61) sampled resident.
The findings are:
A review of the Ord...
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, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure dignity was maintained during lunch service in the dining room as evidenced by staff members not sitting with residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure meals were prepared and served according to the planned written menu to meet the nutritional needs of the residents fo...
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 those re...
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 record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure infection control measures, including hand hygiene were implemented during tracheostomy care for 1 (Resident #9) of ...
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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure kitchen ceiling tiles were cleaned to provide a sanitary environment for food preparation; and the ice machin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure an indwelling urinary catheter drainage bag was concealed in a privacy bag when visible from open door to room and whe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement a Chronic Viral Hepatitis C plan of care for 1 (Resident #47) of 2 (Residents #18 and #47) sampled residents who had ...
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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure facial hair was removed regularly to maintain good grooming for 1 (Resident #63) of 20 (Residents #1, #6, #7, #10, #11...
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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 2 clothes dryers remained free of lint build-up to decrease the potential for fire and loss of laundry services for 1 of 1 laundr...
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
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure sufficient qualified nursing staff were available at all times to provide nursing and related services to meet the resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure meals were prepared and served according to the planned written menu to meet the nutritional needs of the residents fo...
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement procedures to ensure the resident's medical record included documentation the resident either received the pneumococc...
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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure foods stored in the freezer and refrigerator were covered, sealed and dated to minimize the potential for food borne i...
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
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 cleaning chemicals, [named] cloth wipes, and p...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
3 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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents were treated with dignity and re...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pain medication for 1 (Resident #1) of 7 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7) sampled residents; failed to provide a physicia...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the environment was free of safety hazards by failing to repair a broken grab bar in the bathroom for 1 (Resident #3) ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
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 F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable, homelike environment as evidenced by failure to ensure shower room floor and walls were fre...
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, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure staff performed incontinent care on 3 (R #1, R #2, R #3) of 3 (R #1, R #2, R #3) sampled residents who were dependent on...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2022
10 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the resident/representative or Power of Attorney (POA) in writing of the resident's transfer/ discharge to the hospital as required ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0645
(Tag F0645)
Could have caused harm · 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 a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) was co...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0568
(Tag F0568)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the quarterly statements, detailing trust account activity for residents and/or their representatives was provided to pr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0694
(Tag F0694)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interviews the facility failed to ensure parenteral fluids, Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) line were administered consistent with professional s...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure physician orders for oxygen administration were...
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 observations, record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure the licensed practical nurses (LPN) had the specific competencies and skill sets necessary to care for and administer...
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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident on Transmission Based-Precautions (T...
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 food items were removed from stock by their expiration date, food items which were opened were secured in a container that was sealed,...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0885
(Tag F0885)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to inform the residents and/or representatives of a change...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0886
(Tag F0886)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff were tested for COVID 19 according to their Level of C...
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.
- • 30 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • Grade C (50/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is The Springs Of Greers Ferry's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Arkansas, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is The Springs Of Greers Ferry Staffed?
CMS rates THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 51%, compared to the Arkansas average of 46%. RN turnover specifically is 56%, 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 Greers Ferry?
State health inspectors documented 30 deficiencies at THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY during 2022 to 2024. These included: 30 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates The Springs Of Greers Ferry?
THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY 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 140 certified beds and approximately 83 residents (about 59% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in HEBER SPRINGS, Arkansas.
How Does The Springs Of Greers Ferry Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (51%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting The Springs Of Greers Ferry?
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 Greers Ferry Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY 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 2-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 The Springs Of Greers Ferry Stick Around?
THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY has a staff turnover rate of 51%, 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 Greers Ferry Ever Fined?
THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY 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 Greers Ferry on Any Federal Watch List?
THE SPRINGS OF GREERS FERRY 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.