LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN HOME
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Lake Forest Senior Living at Mountain Home has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average but not exceptional. It ranks #67 out of 218 facilities in Arkansas, placing it in the top half, and #2 out of 4 in Baxter County, meaning only one local option is rated higher. The facility's trend is improving, with issues decreasing from 9 in 2024 to just 2 in 2025. While staffing received an average rating of 3 out of 5 stars, the turnover rate is concerning at 62%, higher than the state average of 50%. There have been no fines reported, which is a positive sign, and the facility has more registered nurse coverage than 83% of facilities in the state. However, some weaknesses include issues with food safety, as staff failed to maintain clean kitchen equipment and did not properly date and store food items, which could lead to foodborne illnesses. Additionally, there was a lack of documented abuse prevention training for many staff members, posing a potential risk to all residents. Overall, while there are strengths in RN coverage and an improving trend, families should be aware of the food safety concerns and staffing training gaps.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Arkansas
- #67/218
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 62% 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 ○ Average
- Each resident gets 30 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Arkansas. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 22 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
15pts above Arkansas avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
14 points above Arkansas average of 48%
The Ugly 22 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
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
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure an abuse policy was implemented and monitored that included a training program regarding abuse prevention 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
Deficiency F0947
(Tag F0947)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on facility record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure direct care staff were trained annually for Abuse/Neglect prevention and required in-service training for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
8 deficiencies
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, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure nurse coverage on 11-26-2023 on the 6:00 PM to 11:59 PM shift as evidenced by the shift report. The lack of coverage ha...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Surveyor: [NAME], [NAME]
Based on observations, interviews, record review, facility document review, and facility policy review...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure expired medications and supplies were disposed of; and the facility failed to ensure medications and wound treatment su...
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 observations, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure staff performed h...
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 assure a certified Infection Control Preventionist (ICP) was employed and available at least 20 hours a week, to establish and maintain the...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure kitchen equipment was clean and in good working order to prevent the spread of infection and food borne illnesses. This...
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 the kitchen and kitchen equipment were maintained in clean condition; and failed to ensure food items were sealed, labe...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to revise a care plan for Resident #25 to include Ankle-foot orthosis (AFO)s to both lower legs to ensure the consis...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2024
1 deficiency
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 F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure restorative therapy services were provided to decrease the potential for further decline in range of motion and maintai...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
11 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were accurately coded on the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 1 (Resident #25) of 5 (Residents #1, #7, #10, #12, and #25) sam...
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 tubing and cannulas were stored in an appropriate container to prevent potential contamination when not in use ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure dialysis fistulas and dressings were assessed immediately upon returning to the facility after receiving dialysis trea...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident medications were stored in a locked medication cart to prevent the potential accidental ingestion by other re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach to enable residents to call for assistance for 1 (Resident #8) of 15 (Residents #1, #3, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0583
(Tag F0583)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure privacy was provided to maintain dignity during wound care for 1 (Resident #20) of 1 sampled resident; failed to ensur...
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 nail care was regularly provided to maintain good hygiene and prevent potential injuries or infections for 2 (Resident...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure scissors, razors, clippers, and nail files were locked and stored properly to prevent the potential of accidents and i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% was maintained to prevent potential complications for 1 (Resident #12) of 5 (R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0800
(Tag F0800)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food and beverages were covered while being transported to residents' rooms and while on kitchen counters awaiting mea...
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 or opened and stored in...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "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.
- • 22 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • 62% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN 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 Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home Staffed?
CMS rates LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN HOME's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 62%, which is 15 percentage points above the Arkansas average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. 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 Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home?
State health inspectors documented 22 deficiencies at LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN HOME during 2023 to 2025. These included: 21 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home?
LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN HOME 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 CONTINUUM HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 34 certified beds and approximately 44 residents (about 129% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in MOUNTAIN HOME, Arkansas.
How Does Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN HOME's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (62%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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 high staff turnover rate.
Is Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN 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 Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home Stick Around?
Staff turnover at LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN HOME is high. At 62%, the facility is 15 percentage points above the Arkansas average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 56%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home Ever Fined?
LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN 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 Lake Forest Senior Living At Mountain Home on Any Federal Watch List?
LAKE FOREST SENIOR LIVING AT MOUNTAIN 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.