THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
The Blossoms at White River Rehab & Nursing Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns with care and management. Ranking #212 out of 218 facilities in Arkansas places it in the bottom half, and as #2 of 2 in Jackson County, it suggests there is only one other local option that is slightly better. The facility's trend appears to be improving, as the number of reported issues has decreased from 7 in 2024 to 4 in 2025. However, staffing is a weakness, with a below-average rating of 2 out of 5 stars and a high turnover rate of 46%, which is still slightly better than the state average. Notably, the facility has faced concerning fines totaling $21,645, which is higher than 83% of Arkansas facilities, and there is less RN coverage than 87% of state facilities, raising concerns about the level of medical oversight. Specific incidents reported include a critical failure to monitor a cognitively impaired resident, which led to the resident eloping from the facility and being found dehydrated by law enforcement. Additionally, there were concerns about food safety practices, such as failing to properly date spices and not ensuring dietary staff washed hands before handling food, which could potentially affect the health of residents. While there are serious issues that need addressing, the facility has shown some improvement in recent years, but families should weigh these factors carefully when considering care options.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Arkansas
- #212/218
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 46% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $21,645 in fines. Lower than most Arkansas facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 11 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Arkansas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 23 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
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 23 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
1 deficiency
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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to monitor and supervise a severely cognitively impaired resident to prevent elopement, and failed to ensure staff responded pro...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2025
2 deficiencies
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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that items were dated properly, items were sealed/closed properly, and cross contamination in the kitchen did not occu...
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, interview, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to perfor...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2025
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 F0678
(Tag F0678)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record review, facility policy review, and facility staff certifications, it was determined that the facili...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
7 deficiencies
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 residents who required assistance with activities of daily living were regularly provided with the necessary assistanc...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 a positioning device was utilized to decrease the potential for further decline in range of motion (ROM) for 1 (Residen...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure trays were passed table by table to 3 residents (Resident #11, #35, and #47) out of 18 residents who receive trays in ...
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 and homelike manner for 13 (Rooms 401...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0687
(Tag F0687)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who required assistance with foot care were regularly provided with the necessary assistance to maintain goo...
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 a resident was protected from hazards by having a vent area in the room with exposed wiring and by having no light in ...
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 spices stored in the cabinet or on a shelf in the storage room were dated for first-in-first out spice rotation; and d...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to clean and eliminate black substances, properly store shower linen, an...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
11 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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable, homelike environment for 1 of 1 (Resident #95) sample selected residents with deteriorated furniture. This...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure sharps containers located in the 400 and 100 hall shower rooms...
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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accu...
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 F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Care Plan meetings were held regularly for 1 (Resident #35) of 1 sample selected resident and their family and failed to ensure the ...
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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared by methods that maintained the appearance and encourage good nutritional intake for the residents who received puree...
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, record review, 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 complicatio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0836
(Tag F0836)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure required proof of State residency for 5 years was obtained from new hires to determine if Federal background checks needed to be per...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0847
(Tag F0847)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Binding Arbitration Agreement provided for the selection of a neutral arbitrator or a venue was convenient to both parties for 8...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0848
(Tag F0848)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Binding Arbitration Agreement provided for the selection of a neutral arbitrator or a venue was convenient to both parties for 8...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Data
(Tag F0851)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to submit accurate required Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) staffing data of Registered Nurse (RN) hours. The findings are:
a. On 12/09/22 the PBJ...
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 kitchen and dry storage for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen; failed to ensure a freezer air vent was functioning ...
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.
- • 23 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $21,645 in fines. Higher than 94% of Arkansas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade F (26/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is The Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER 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 Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center Staffed?
CMS rates THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 46%, compared to the Arkansas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at The Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center?
State health inspectors documented 23 deficiencies at THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 22 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates The Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center?
THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER 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 BLOSSOMS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 130 certified beds and approximately 73 residents (about 56% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in NEWPORT, Arkansas.
How Does The Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (46%) 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 Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center?
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 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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.
Is The Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER 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 Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center Stick Around?
THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 46%, which is about average for Arkansas nursing homes (state average: 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 Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center Ever Fined?
THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER has been fined $21,645 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Arkansas average of $33,295. 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 Blossoms At White River Rehab & Nursing Center on Any Federal Watch List?
THE BLOSSOMS AT WHITE RIVER REHAB & NURSING CENTER 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.