THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
The Woods, a nursing home in Monticello, Arkansas, has a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and a poor reputation. It ranks #215 out of 218 facilities in the state, placing it in the bottom half, and is the second option out of two in Drew County, meaning there is only one local competitor. The facility's trend is improving, with issues decreasing from 12 in 2024 to 11 in 2025, but it still faces serious concerns. Staffing is average with a 3/5 rating, and the 54% turnover rate is on par with the state average, which suggests some stability, but this is still concerning. The facility has $15,940 in fines, which is higher than 80% of similar facilities, indicating repeated compliance problems. There is average RN coverage, which is crucial as RNs can catch issues that other staff may miss. Specific incidents include a critical failure where a resident was able to exit the facility using a code they were not supposed to have, posing a serious safety risk. Additionally, there were concerns about expired food items not being removed, which could lead to foodborne illnesses, and issues with the kitchen equipment not being maintained properly, potentially affecting the quality of meals for residents. While there are some strengths, such as an improving trend in issues and average staffing levels, the overall safety and quality of care provided at The Woods raises significant red flags for families considering this option.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Arkansas
- #215/218
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 54% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $15,940 in fines. Lower than most Arkansas facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 21 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Arkansas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 38 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)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near Arkansas avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 38 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
9 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility did not ensure residents were not provided the code to entrance/exit doors to safeguard res...
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
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, it was determined the facility did not ensure the quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment reflected a behavior that the resident exhibited for one (Resident #20) of...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Based on record review and interviews, it was determined that the facility did not ensure a Care Plan was accurately revised to reflect a resident's elopement and/or wandering status after an incident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interviews, it was determined the facility did not provide appropriate services and treatment to prevent complications for one (Resident #41) of two residents ...
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
Deficiency Text Not Available
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 observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review it was determined the facility failed to ensure meal service assistance was provided in a timely manner for one (Resident #...
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, record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure meals were served in a method that maintained the appearance, nutritive value and taste of pur...
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 expired food items were promptly removed or discarded on or before the expiration or use by date to prevent t...
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 observations, record review, interviews and facility policy review it was determined the facility did not ensure infection control measures were used and staff wore the proper Personal Protec...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2025
2 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
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure all areas of the skin were cleansed during inco...
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
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff performed hand h...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2024
6 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
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews and record review, it was determined the facility failed to notify the State of Long Term-Care Ombudsman in writing of a transfer to the hospital for 1 resident (Resident #1) revie...
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 F0676
(Tag F0676)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an assistive communication device was utilized to facilitate communication between a resident and staff for 1 (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
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the enteral feed and flush was administered at the physician's ordered rate for 1 (Resident #3) sampled resident who r...
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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Deficiency Text Not Available
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
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure staff provided proper incontinence care to 1 (Resident #6) sampled resident.
The findings inc...
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, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff used proper hand hygiene while providing care to 1 (Resident #6) sampled resident.
The...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
6 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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure fingernails were clean, smooth, and trimmed to promote good personal hygiene and grooming for 1 (Resident #49) sampled ...
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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a raised toilet seat and outer toilet bowl was cleansed of a dark brown substance to promote a clean and sanitary envi...
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 products 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
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure expired food items were promptly removed from stock to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meal trays from...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0567
(Tag F0567)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to act as a responsible fiduciary of the resident's funds and hold, safeguard, manage, and account for the personal funds of the resident depo...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0568
(Tag F0568)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview, record review, facility document review and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain separate accounting for each resident's funds.
The findi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
15 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0637
(Tag F0637)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to complete a Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) within 14 days of the identification of a decline and/or impro...
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
Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to refer 1 (Resident #39) of 6 (Residents #13, #22, #24, #28, #39 and #54) sampled residents who was identified with possibly serious mental ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 ensure residents were care planned for required assis...
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 follow their policy for storage of residents' lighters, matches, electronic cigarettes as well as other smoking related items...
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, 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
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0808
(Tag F0808)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician's plan of care for thickened liq...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
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 residents or resident representatives were supplied the inf...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
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 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurately coded fo...
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
2. Resident #47 had diagnoses of Unspecified Dementia, Unspecified Severity, Without Behavioral Disturbance, Psychotic Disturbance, Mood Disturbance and Anxiety. The Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 01/27...
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** Surveyor: Rather, [NAME]
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to obtain Physician Orders for ...
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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the appropriate use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and Isolation Protocols for Transmission Based Precautions ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0882
(Tag F0882)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Infection Preventionist had adequate time to perform the duties of the position and to adequately monitor and manage the Infect...
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, the facility failed to ensure the Pneumococcal immunizations were administered to eligible residents and immunization records were accurately documented for 4 (R...
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 oven was maintained in good working condition; employees washed their hands and changed gloves when contaminated to decrease the ...
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
Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to inform residents, their representatives, and families, of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases in the facility by 5:00 PM the next day. T...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "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.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 38 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $15,940 in fines. Above average for Arkansas. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade F (26/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is The Woods, A Nightingale Community's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Woods, A Nightingale Community Staffed?
CMS rates THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 54%, compared to the Arkansas average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at The Woods, A Nightingale Community?
State health inspectors documented 38 deficiencies at THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 35 with potential for harm, and 2 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates The Woods, A Nightingale Community?
THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY 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 122 certified beds and approximately 76 residents (about 62% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in MONTICELLO, Arkansas.
How Does The Woods, A Nightingale Community Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (54%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting The Woods, A Nightingale Community?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is The Woods, A Nightingale Community Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Arkansas. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at The Woods, A Nightingale Community Stick Around?
THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY has a staff turnover rate of 54%, which is 8 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 Woods, A Nightingale Community Ever Fined?
THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY has been fined $15,940 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Arkansas average of $33,238. 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 The Woods, A Nightingale Community on Any Federal Watch List?
THE WOODS, A NIGHTINGALE COMMUNITY 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.