MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Montgomery County Nursing Home in Mount Ida, Arkansas, has received a Trust Grade of B+, which indicates it is above average and recommended for consideration. It ranks #69 out of 218 facilities in the state, placing it in the top half overall, and is the only option in Montgomery County. The facility is improving, reducing its issues from four in 2024 to just one in 2025, which is a positive trend. While staffing is a weakness with a low rating of 1 out of 5 stars, the turnover rate of 22% is significantly better than the state average, suggesting some staff stability. There have been no fines on record, which is a good sign, and the nursing home has a concerning history with specific incidents, such as improper food storage and failure to maintain hand hygiene, which could affect residents' health.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Arkansas
- #69/218
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 22% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 26 points below Arkansas's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Arkansas facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- RN staffing data not reported for this facility.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (22%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (22%)
26 points below Arkansas average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
No Significant Concerns Identified
This facility shows no red flags. Among Arkansas's 100 nursing homes, only 1% achieve this.
The Ugly 16 deficiencies on record
May 2025
1 deficiency
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, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility did not ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were implemented and that staff wore p...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0583
(Tag F0583)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect 1 (Resident #53) sampled resident ' s privacy by leaving the Medication Administration Record [MAR] book open and una...
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 fingernails were kept clean to promote good personal hygiene and grooming for 1 (Resident #47) of 6 sampled residents ...
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 observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment was as free of potential accident hazards as possible, as evidenced by failure to ensure med...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure dishcloths and scouring pads were stored in a ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
11 deficiencies
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 BiPAP [Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure] mask was properly stored in a bag when not in use to prevent potential possib...
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 residents in the same Dining Room and at the same table were served concurrently to promote dignity and respect for 1 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0567
(Tag F0567)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who had a resident Trust Fund account with the facility received monthly applicable interest deposited into the account o...
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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure generally accepted proper bookkeeping techniques were followed to accurately reconcile individual resident Trust Funds for 3 (Resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0569
(Tag F0569)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who received Medicaid benefits were notified when the amount in their Trust Fund account was within $200.00 of the maximu...
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 in accordance with the planned, written menu, to meet the nutritional needs of the resi...
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, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared by methods that maintained the flavor and appearance; hot foods were served hot and cold foods were ...
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 F0895
(Tag F0895)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure monitoring and auditing were conducted on a regular basis by the Compliance Officer in the areas of resident trusts and admissions ...
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 food items stored in the refrigerator and dry storage areas were sealed, covered and dated; leftover food items were m...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0836
(Tag F0836)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to be in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes by failing to ensure the admission Packets wer...
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+ (80/100). 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.
- • 22% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 26 points below Arkansas's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • 16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Montgomery County's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 Montgomery County Staffed?
CMS rates MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 22%, compared to the Arkansas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Montgomery County?
State health inspectors documented 16 deficiencies at MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME during 2023 to 2025. These included: 16 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Montgomery County?
MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 112 certified beds and approximately 68 residents (about 61% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in MOUNT IDA, Arkansas.
How Does Montgomery County Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (22%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Montgomery County?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "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 below-average staffing rating.
Is Montgomery County Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME 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 4-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 Montgomery County Stick Around?
Staff at MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 22%, the facility is 23 percentage points below the Arkansas average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 17%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.
Was Montgomery County Ever Fined?
MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME 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 Montgomery County on Any Federal Watch List?
MONTGOMERY COUNTY NURSING HOME 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.