RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB

1023 HIGHWAY 119, RECTOR, AR 72461 (870) 595-1040
For profit - Corporation 70 Beds ANTHONY & BRYAN ADAMS Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
71/100
#31 of 218 in AR
Last Inspection: June 2024

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Rector Nursing and Rehab has received a Trust Grade of B, indicating it is a good choice compared to other facilities. It ranks #31 out of 218 nursing homes in Arkansas, placing it in the top half, and #2 out of 3 in Clay County, meaning only one local option is better. The facility is improving, with a decrease in reported issues from three in 2024 to one in 2025. However, staffing is a concern, as it has a 67% turnover rate-higher than the state average-suggesting instability among caregivers. The facility also faced $14,069 in fines, which is higher than 85% of Arkansas facilities, indicating potential compliance problems. On a positive note, it has good RN coverage, exceeding 88% of state facilities, ensuring better care oversight. Specific incidents include a critical finding where a resident was improperly secured in a wheelchair during transport, posing a serious risk of injury, and dietary staff failed to wash their hands before handling food, potentially risking foodborne illnesses for residents. Additionally, some residents were not fed at the same time, undermining their dignity during mealtimes. Overall, while there are strengths in RN coverage and a solid overall rating, families should be aware of the staffing issues and recent incidents that raise concerns.

Trust Score
B
71/100
In Arkansas
#31/218
Top 14%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
3 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
67% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
○ Average
$14,069 in fines. Higher than 70% of Arkansas facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 28 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Arkansas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
○ Average
6 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 3 issues
2025: 1 issues

The Good

  • 5-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

Staff Turnover: 67%

20pts above Arkansas avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $14,069

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

Chain: ANTHONY & BRYAN ADAMS

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (67%)

19 points above Arkansas average of 48%

The Ugly 6 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening
Feb 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

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure transport staff correctly se...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure transport staff correctly secured a resident in a wheelchair according to the manufacturer's instructions and was properly trained with return demonstration on the use of the van's safety restraints prior to securing and transporting 1 (Resident #1) resident in a wheelchair to prevent serious injury for 1 resident who was transported on the facility van. The lack of effective training for the transport driver resulted in Resident #1 falling backward in a wheelchair during transport and being positioned in the wheelchair in a manner that had the likelihood to affect Resident #1's ability to breathe. It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was related to the State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, §483.25 (Quality of Care) at a scope and severity of J. The IJ began on [DATE] at 1:30 PM when Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 put Resident #1 on the facility transport van to take to a doctor appointment approximately 40 miles away without proper training. The Administrator and the Registered Nurse Consultant (RNC) were notified of the Past Non-Compliance (PNC) Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on [DATE] at 3:51 PM. A corrected IJ Template was requested by the NC and resubmitted at 5:51 PM. The facility was found to be in Compliance on [DATE] at 3:00 PM when the facility's Plan of Correction (POC) was confirmed complete by the State Survey Agency. The findings include: A review of an admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #1 with diagnoses of type 2 diabetes mellitus (a condition where the pancreas doesn't make enough insulin), congestive heart failure (a chronic condition in which the heart doesn't pump blood as well as it should), atrial fibrillation (an irregular, often rapid heart rate that commonly causes poor blood flow), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD-a lung disease that blocks airflow and makes it difficult to breathe) and chronic kidney disease (a progressive loss of kidney function). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of [DATE] indicated Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact, and had functional impairment of lower extremities requiring the use of a walker for short distance and a wheelchair for long distance mobility. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan, initiated [DATE], revealed the resident's code status was Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). Review of Resident #1's Care Plan, initiated [DATE], revealed the resident had emphysema/COPD related to smoking in the past, interventions included monitor for difficulty breathing (dyspnea) on exertion and to remind the resident not to push beyond endurance. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan, initiated [DATE], revealed the resident had limited physical mobility related to legs giving way, and was able to ambulate for short distances or propel by wheelchair by self. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan, initiated [DATE], revealed the resident had oxygen therapy related to a respiratory illness, interventions included oxygen via nasal cannula (nasal prongs) at 2 l/min (liters per minute) as needed (PRN). A review of a Incident Narrative # PFD2500497 from (911 provider) revealed the call was received on [DATE] at 2:18:04 PM, where Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 reported she was on the side of the road across from (business name). Resident #1's wheelchair had slipped backwards, and the resident wasn't breathing. CNA #1 said she couldn't get the wheelchair out from underneath the resident. She hit a bump, and the wheelchair flipped backwards. The resident had too many clothes on, and she couldn't tell if Resident #1's chest was going up and down, but there was no way she could do Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) but could see Resident #1's eyes twitching. At 2:22 PM (city name) Fire Department (PFD) arrived on scene and at 2:24 PM CPR was initiated. The dispatch call disconnected at 2:31 PM. A review of a Incident Narrative #2025-497 from PFD dated [DATE] at 2:19 PM revealed PFD was dispatched to a call where the patient had fallen and was no longer responsive. PFD arrived on scene at a transit van parked on the side of the highway. PFD was approached by the driver of the van who alerted PFD the patient was not breathing and was inside at the back of the van. When PFD entered the van, the patient was in a wheelchair which had fallen backwards, pinning the patient between the wheelchair and the wheelchair lift on their back. PFD then sat the wheelchair in the upright position while checking for responsiveness of the patient. When the wheelchair was sitting upright PFD observed that the patient was unresponsive and not breathing. PFD then moved the patient from the chair and onto the floor of the van and began CPR. PFD continued rotations of CPR while also giving breaths through a BVM (Bag-Valve-Mask). When EMS (Emergency Medical Service) arrived, PFD and EMS removed the patient from the van onto the stretcher and continued CPR. EMS and PFD loaded the patient into the ambulance for further treatment. PFD entered the ambulance to help with continuing CPR and other treatment. When EMS was ready to transport, firefighter (PFD #7)) drove the ambulance while firefighter (PFD #4) followed in Unit L-1. When all units arrived on scene at (named hospital), PFD assisted with unloading the patient from the ambulance and taking them into the hospital. PFD continued CPR until EMS and hospital staff advised PFD they were no longer needed. PFD cleared the scene and returned to service. A review of a Incident Statement from (city name) Police Department (PPD) revealed at approximately 2:19 PM on February 10, 2025, Lieutenant PPD #5 responded to an unconscious person, later identified as (Resident #1), at the intersection of (street name) and (street name). Once on scene, PPD #5 contacted Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1, who said she worked for a nursing home in (city named) where Resident #1 stays. CNA #1 stated she was transporting the resident to (city approximately 40 miles from the nursing home) for a doctor ' s appointment. CNA #1 stated she looked back and the resident had fallen back in the wheelchair and was stuck. CNA #1 stated she then pulled over and realized that she couldn ' t pick resident up and called emergency services. At the time of speaking with CNA #1, the resident was in the ambulance receiving CPR. PPD #5 escorted the ambulance to (hospital name). A review of a Incident Statement from PPD revealed that on [DATE] Lieutenant PPD #6 was dispatched to the area of (address given) in reference to a person unconscious. Upon arrival, the unconscious person later identified as Resident #1 was in the back of an EMS ambulance being given CPR. A (facility name) van was on scene. PPD #6 advised driver CNA #1 go to the PPD and speak with detectives, and provided CNA #1 with directions on how to get to the PD. Upon arrival to (hospital named), Fire and EMS staff stated when they arrived on scene, Resident #1 had been folded inside the van and ramp. Fire and EMS staff stated when they arrived Resident #1 was unresponsive, and they began CPR shortly after arrival. While at the ER (emergency room), Resident #1 coded (When a patient is described as having coded, this generally refers to cardiac arrest) and nursing staff were able to resuscitate the resident to allow the family to arrive and tell the ER staff that Resident #1 had a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate). Shortly after Resident #1 coded and was brought back, a Detective from the Criminal Division arrived on scene. A review of a Criminal Investigation Note Case Note - 25-F-123 dated [DATE] at 2:44 PM, revealed PPD Officers contacted a Detective from Criminal Division regarding a (named facility) patient, later known as Resident #1, that was being transported to a doctor's appointment in (named a city approximately 40 miles from the facility). Officers explained that during the transport, Resident #1 had fallen over and was unconscious. Officers stated that EMS was on scene and currently providing lifesaving aid. Officers stated that they will be escorting an ambulance through town going to (named hospital) for additional medical services. The driver of van, (CNA #1), was interviewed at the police department, located at (address). The interview was conducted by Detective (name). CNA #1 stated she works at (named facility). She was taking Resident #1 to a scheduled doctor's appointment. CNA #1 said she had been an employee with the nursing home for about six years and was familiar with the resident. CNA #1 said she loaded Resident #1 in the van around l:30 pm. CNA #1 said it took about 10 minutes to get resident in the van and strapped down inside the van. CNA #1 said they left the nursing home in (named city of facility) around l:40 pm. CNA #1 said they were talking and at some point, Resident #1 stopped talking. CNA #1 said that when she came up to the (name of High School), she noticed that Resident #1 had fallen backwards. CNA #1 said the resident never said anything about any of the buckles or straps coming loose during transport. CNA #1 said when she realized Resident #1 had fallen, she immediately pulled over and attempted to pick resident up. CNA #1 said she was not able to get resident up and called 911. CNA #1 said that she doesn't know what happened or how Resident #1 fell. CNA #1 said she doesn't know if she may have hit a bump just right or what. CNA #1 said that Resident #1 was talking and told her I can't breathe and then suddenly passed out. When she couldn ' t get the resident up, she called for help. CNA #1 said EMS arrived and immediately began performing CPR. CNA #1 said she has transported patients on several occasions and nothing like this has ever happened. Following the interview, photographs were taken of the transport van along with a demonstration from CNA #1 explaining how the straps were used during the transport. After strapping the wheelchair down, it was apparent that the wheelchair was still able to be pushed backwards. The video from (intersection identified) was reviewed and downloaded into the case file. After reviewing all evidence in this case, probable cause for an arrest was not established and no criminal charges will be filed. A review of a Progress Note Type: Nursing Incident & Accident (I & A) dated [DATE] at 7:33 PM revealed the Administrator received a call from the transport CNA #1 that resident had tilted back in the wheelchair. CNA #1 reported she heard Resident #1 say I flipped so she pulled over and went back to the resident to assist with no luck sitting resident back upright, so CNA #1 then called for an ambulance. A review of a facility incident report dated [DATE] at 2:15 PM indicated the Administrator received a phone notification from the van driver (CNA #1) approximately 2:30 PM that she had to pull over and call 911 for a resident in transport who tilted backward in a wheelchair. The Findings and Actions Taken: During transport the resident tilted back in a chair and notified the driver (CNA #1). Van driver (CNA #1) immediately pulled over to a safe place and climbed to the back of van to assist. When the van driver (CNA #1) found she could not assist Resident #1 back to upright position, she called 911 at approximately 2:17 pm. Resident #1 stated they could not breathe and then went unconscious. First on scene was the fire department at which time they entered the van and were able to assist Resident #1 to the floor on the van and initiate CPR. EMS arrived shortly after and was able to take resident through the back of van on stretcher and into ambulance to be transported to (named hospital) for treatment. The report indicated CNA #1 performed a demonstration of securing the wheelchair for the officer, and the straps securing the wheelchair were loose and allowed the wheelchair to be moved backwards without force. It was noted CNA #1 did not tighten the strap using a black knob designed to be used to remove slack from the securement straps. It was indicated this failure to properly tighten the straps allowed Resident #1's wheelchair to move to the tilted position. A review of a Coroner Report Investigation Summary dated [DATE] at 11:39 pm indicated Resident #1 was brought in from (named nursing home). According to (named hospital) clinical notes, Resident #1 arrived by EMS due to patient collapsing. The decedent was examined. There appeared to be a contusion on the upper part of the chest, but no other apparent trauma. The suspected cause of death was indicated to be cardiac. A review of Witness Statement with a date of [DATE] revealed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 loaded Resident #1 in the facility van to transport to doctor appointment. She had never taken this resident in the van, so it took her about 10 minutes to strap all 4 straps and hook the seat belt. She started with the back strap and tightened it and proceeded to the rest of the straps. After strapping them down, she pushed the button to make sure the straps were fastened. CNA #1 then went behind the wheelchair and shook it from side to side to make sure it was secure. She proceeded to get in and drive the van. CNA #1 and Resident #1 were talking during the transport and the next thing she knew she heard Resident #1 say they had flipped. CNA #1 said the resident was actually tilted back with Resident #1's head against the lift gate. Resident #1's feet were off the floor and all the straps were still fastened. She was trying to get the resident and chair up but was unable to, so she called 911 at 2:17 pm. CNA #1 said 911 wanted her to start CPR but she was unable to with the position the resident was in and being by herself. When the PFD arrived, CNA #1 got out of the van and opened the back doors to let the lift gate down. PFD got Resident #1 to the floor and the wheelchair out of the van by unstrapping the rest of the straps. On [DATE] at 1:30 PM, Transport CNA #2 and Transport CNA #3 demonstrated loading, unloading, and securing of a resident in a wheelchair. During the demonstration, it was determined when the wheelchair wheels were locked, the 4 tie-down straps were attached to the wheelchair (2 on the front and 2 on the back) and the tension of the straps manually tightened by a black tension retractor knob, no movement of the wheelchair would occur. On [DATE] at 08:30 AM, the Administrator and Maintenance Director demonstrated the black tension retractor knob on the floor anchors had dual action with two steps to be completed. First, push the button to remove the slack in the tie-down straps then turn the black tension retractor knob to remove all the slack. A review of the manufacture User Instructions QRT-1 Series Q ' Straint indicated to secure a wheelchair: 1. Place w/c facing forward in securement area; apply wheel locks or turn power off. 2. Attach tie-down into floor anchorages (fig 1) and ensure they are locked in. 3. Attach the four tie-down hooks to solid frame members or weldments, near seat level. Ensure tie-downs are fixed at approximately 45 degrees and are within angles shown in (Fig 2). Do not attach to wheels, plastic or removable parts of wheelchair. 4. Ensure all tie-downs are locked and properly tensioned. If necessary, rock wheelchair back and forth or manually tension retractor knobs (if present) to take up additional webbing slack. To secure a passenger, the lab belts and shoulder blet were secured and adjusted as firmly as possible, but consistent with user comfort. A review of manufacture Sure-Lok Installation/Operation Instructions for L Track Applications of Retraktors with S-hooks indicated to 1) center wheelchair in a forward-facing position between the front and rear retractors. Push the rear retractor release lever and pull out the webbing. Release the lever and place the S-hook securely around the structural member of the chair. Pull on the S-hook to ensure full engagement around the structural member. Push the release lever until the loose webbing is retrieved into the retractor. Repeat procedure with the other rear retractor. 2) Push the front retractor release lever and pull out the webbing. Release the lever and place the S-hook securely around the structural member of the chair. Pull on the S-hook to ensure full engagement around the structural member. Push the release lever until the loose webbing is retrieved into the retractor. Repeat procedure with the other front retractor and 3) Tension the retractors by turning the tensioning handles until the straps are tight. During a telephone interview on [DATE] at 3:06 PM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 said she pushed Resident #1 to the van and put wheelchair on the lift then lifted to go inside van. CNA #1 said she started with the back two straps, used the hook to attach to the wheelchair, then proceeded to the front two straps at the front of the chair. She pushed the button on the straps to make sure it was tight, then put the shoulder seat belt and the belt across Resident #1's stomach. CNA #1 said she then shook the wheelchair left to right to make sure it was secure. After Resident #1 was secure, she noted that it was 1:40 PM when they actually left the facility. CNA #1 said she was driving along and occasionally looking in the rearview mirror at Resident #1 while they were talking. When she got close to (name of school), Resident #1 quit talking so she looked back at the resident. Resident #1 said I fell back. CNA #1 said she pulled over and went through the van to the resident. Resident #1 told CNA #1, I'm having trouble breathing. She said she couldn't lift the wheelchair back up, Resident #1 was too heavy for her to lift. CNA #1 said she immediately called 911 for help. The 911 dispatch advised her to do CPR, but she said she couldn't, due to the position Resident #1 was in. The (city name) Fire Department (PFD) showed up and got Resident #1 out of the wheelchair and on the floor on the van and then started CPR. EMS showed up and took over CPR until they could transfer Resident #1 to the hospital. When EMS got there, CNA #1 called the Administrator and told her what happened. CNA #1 said police wanted her to tell them what happened, so she gave a witness statement before driving back to the facility. CNA #1 said she was not the regular driver; she was doing it as a favor because regular transport CNA #2 had a doctor appointment and CNA #3 had a family emergency. She confirmed she worked at the facility for almost 6 years and had taken residents to appointments a couple of times, but the residents she had transported could walk on the van and seatbelt themselves in. She had never taken a resident that required securing of a wheelchair. CNA #1 confirmed she had never been trained to transport a resident in a wheelchair; she was shown once how to do it, but she never had signed off on a check list or been formally trained. A review of Van Transport Log dated [DATE] - [DATE] was reviewed. CNA #1 was recorded on 2 different occasions; [DATE] driving the van to take blood to the hospital and on [DATE] taking Resident #1 to doctor appointment. During an interview on [DATE] at 1:40 PM, the surveyor requested training verification of CNA #1 for van transport and usage of floor anchors. The Administrator was unable to provide any training on transporting for CNA #1. During an interview on [DATE] at 2:00 PM, Certified Nurse Aid (CNA)/Transport #3 said that she had worked at facility as a transporter off and on for about 9 years. She had received training on the job before the incident on [DATE] and after the incident, she had watched videos with return demonstration check off with CNA/transport #2 and the Maintenance Director. She said she thought the Administrator was responsible for ensuring the transporters had completed the training and was getting training every 6 months. During an interview of [DATE] at 3:30 PM, CNA/Transport #2 said she had worked at facility for 2 years. She had on the job training before the incident on [DATE] and training through Mobility works, with a check-off demonstration of their knowledge. CNA/Transport #2 said after the incident they watched 2 online videos and then did the teach back demonstration. She said that she and the Maintenance Director complete the training with Mobility Works, then come back and train CNA/Transport #3 every 6 months. During an interview on [DATE] at 3:49 PM, the Administrator confirmed that she will ensure training/re-training is received for all transport staff every six months. In addition, CNA/Tranasport #2 will retain records to show the training and demonstration/teach back forms. Review of a facility policy titled, Motor Vehicles revised [DATE] indicated 3. If driving the facility van, the employee must be trained on proper procedure and van usage. Prior to the surveyor entering the facility, the following corrective actions were performed by the facility and verified to be completed: 1. All staff members who will be driving the facility van will have a valid driver's license and an approved driving record - Human Resources will obtain a copy of staff members' driver's license. Completed [DATE] 2. All staff members who will be driving the facility van will have a valid driver's license and an approved driving record - A check of the employees' driving record will be logged by human resources. Completed [DATE] 3. All staff members who will be driving the facility van or assisting during transport will be trained per manufactures guidelines/operator training videos and facility checklist. This will include instructions on lift operation and use of a sure-lock restraint system - Maintenance / Designee will ensure that all staff members who will be transporting or assisting with transport are trained. Staff members will demonstrate competency of education with the return demonstration prior to driving/transporting. This will be completed initially and then biannually & PRN for continued demonstration of competency. Started [DATE] and completed [DATE] 4. All staff members who will be driving the facility van or assisting during transport will be trained per manufactures guidelines/operator training videos and facility checklist. This will include instructions on lift operation and use of a sure-lock restraint system - All staff members who participate in transportation will watch the training videos initially prior to driving/transport and then bi-annually for continuing education. Started [DATE] and completed [DATE] 5. All staff members who will be driving the facility van or assisting during transport will be trained per manufactures guidelines/operator training videos and facility checklist. This will include instructions on lift operation and use of a sure-lock restraint system - Training will focus on ensuring sure-lock restraint system is used properly. Started [DATE] and completed [DATE] 6. The facility will maintain employee competency check offs for van drivers. The facility will maintain a current list of employees who have been trained to drive the facility van and to assist with transportation. Completed [DATE] 7. The facility will maintain a current list of employees who have been trained to drive the facility van and to assist with transportation - The maintenance/designee will give all competency check offs and employee training to human resources as Proof of training and competence. Completed [DATE] 8. The facility will maintain a current list of employees who have been trained to drive the facility van and to assist with transportation - Human resources will keep a current list of all trained transport aides and assistants. Completed [DATE] 9. The facility will maintain a current list of employees who have been trained to drive the facility van and to assist with transportation - Human resources will provide the Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing with a current list of trained staff members. Completed [DATE] 10. The facility will maintain a current list of employees who have been trained to drive the facility van and to assist with transportation - The Director of Nursing and/or Assistant Director of Nursing will only assign those staff members who have been trained and demonstrate competence with the facility process to participate in transportation. Completed [DATE] 11. Pre-transport inspection - The transportation aide will perform a pre-transport documented inspection confirmed daily, prior to transport, per facility checklist, prior to first transport. Completed [DATE] current and ongoing per van schedule. 12. Pre-transport inspection - The inspection check list will be signed after completion of the inspection daily and given to the administrator to maintain. Completed [DATE] 13. Maintenance inspection of facility van - Maintenance will perform an inspection of the facility van for safety and proper functioning of all equipment weekly and PRN. Completed [DATE] and ongoing weekly. 14. Maintenance inspection of facility van - Maintenance will keep records of the inspections, and any negative findings will be reported to the administrator and addressed before the van is placed back in use. Completed [DATE] and up to date. 15. Incidents/Accidents - All incidents/accidents will immediately be reported to the Administrator and Director of Nursing. Completed [DATE] 16. Incidents/Accidents will be investigated, and an incident report completed. A Red Alert will be sent to the risk management team. Completed [DATE] 17. Monitoring - Every transport from the facility will be monitored by a second trained staff member for accuracy weekly for 4 weeks. Completed upon return from (van company name) clearance inspection with no negative findings. 18. Monitoring - A second trained individual will monitor weekly for 2 weeks. 19. Monitoring - The above plan will be presented to the QAA committee monthly, and any negative finding. 20. Follow up - Any transport driver found that not following the appropriate transport policies will be immediately taken off transportation duty and disciplined up to and including termination. Completed [DATE] 21. Suspension of Van - Van was taken out of commission until it could be checked by (van company name) and cleared for use. Completed [DATE] 22. Employee Suspension - Employee involved in incident was suspended pending investigation. Completed [DATE] 23. Van inspection by life Safety Consultant - Life Safety inspected van and reviewed/observed required trainings per facility protocol with facility trainer. Completed [DATE] 24. Life Safety checked off for [NAME] - Life Safety completed all required checkoffs with van drivers on proper positioning when strapping down wheelchair to ensure safety, with return demonstration. Completed [DATE] 25. New tools to be initiated - Visual cues to be placed on transport w/c (in red) and any personal w/c used for transport, to indicate placement for hooks on the straps. Completed [DATE] 26. New tools to be initiated - Visual step by step instructions be placed on back of headrest of bench seat for transport driver. Completed [DATE]
Jun 2024 3 deficiencies
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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure interventions were utilized to prevent worsening of contractures in 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #14). The findin...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure interventions were utilized to prevent worsening of contractures in 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #14). The findings are: a. A review of the Order Summary revealed Resident #14 had diagnoses of stroke, aphasia (a language disorder that affects how you communicate), and hemiplegia and hemiparesis (complete paralysis and partial muscle weakness) affecting the right dominant side. b. A review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 05/20/2024 revealed Resident #14 scored a 7 (severe cognitive impairment) on the Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS). A review of Section GG reveals Resident #14 has limited range of motion impairment on one side for upper and lower extremity. c. A review of Resident #14's Care Plan revealed: Focus: The resident has an ADL [activities of daily living] self-care performance deficit R/T [related to] muscle weakness, abnormal gait, vision and CVA [Cerebral Vascular Accident (stroke)] . Goal: The resident will maintain current level of function in in ADLs through the review date . Intervention: NURSING hand rolls in bilateral hands. d. A review of Resident #14's Care Plan revealed: Focus: Weakness and Right-Hand Contracture, Goal: to muscle weakness, Interventions: resident to have hand splint on while up. e. On 06/10/2024 at 11:30 AM, the Surveyor observed Resident #14 to be up in the dayroom next to the nurse's station. The right hand was contracted into a closed fist with no interventions in place. f. On 06/10/2024 at 1:30 PM, the Surveyor observed Resident #14 to have no interventions in the right hand. The right hand was still closed like a fist. g. On 06/11/2024 at 12:20 PM, the Surveyor observed Resident #14 eating lunch in the dining room. No interventions were in the right hand. The right hand was still closed like a fist. h. On 06/12/2024 at 9:30 AM, the Surveyor observed Resident #14 being pushed to their room, no interventions were in the resident's right hand. The right hand was still closed like a fist. i. On 06/12/2024 at 9:40 AM, during an interview Certified Nursing Assistant #1 (CNA) stated that she is familiar with Resident #14's care, usually I float the building. CNA #1 then stated Resident #14 had interventions, but they are lost and have not been able to find them to use as normal. CNA #1 stated she did not know how long the interventions had been lost. CNA #1 stated they usually use a hand roll, but they could have used wash clothes as well. CNA #1 stated the contracture could worsen, if not cleansed properly and could become red and irritated. j. On 06/12/2024 at 11:04 AM, during an interview Certified Occupational Therapist Assistant (COTA) #3 stated the restorative aide left recently, and I was not informed about the missing hand roll. Then stated they had got that at another facility for the resident as it pumps up to slowly expand the contracture, as the resident's contracture was so difficult to start with. k. On 06/12/2024 at 2:05 PM, during an interview Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 stated the resident was supposed to have a hand roll in place for the contracted hand. LPN #2 then stated without an intervention the contracture will not correct itself, and it will not have the inability to stretch, not allowing staff to perform nail care. Then LPN #2 stated this can cause redness, wounds, and infections if it was not properly cleansed or taken care of. l. A review of the policy Restorative Nursing Services stated, .5. Restorative goals may include but are not limited to supporting and assisting the resident in: a. Adjusting or adapting to changing abilities; b. developing, maintaining, or strengthening his/her physiological and psychological resources .
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure controlled medications were stored in a locked...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure controlled medications were stored in a locked and permanently affixed box in the medication refrigerator. The findings are: 1. On 6/12/2024 at 9:30 AM, during observation of the medication storage room, the Director of Nurses (DON) was showing locked boxes of controlled medications in a mini fridge inside of Medication Storage room [ROOM NUMBER]. There was a larger black box, which had a lock on it and was affixed to a refrigerator shelf. There was a smaller black box, which was also locked, but the DON was able to pick it up off the shelf. The DON said, I don't think I have a key to this one. The DON and the Surveyor stepped outside of the storage room, while the DON went and got the key to unlock the small black box. The DON returned with the key and unlocked the smaller black box. It contained liquid Ativan (Lorazepam). The DON said, I believe that should be affixed to the refrigerator shelf. a. On 06/12/2024 at 3:04 PM, a policy on Medication Labeling and Storage was provided by Administrator. b. The policy stated under Medication Storage, article #7, Controlled substances (listed as Schedule II-V of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1976) and other drugs subject to abuse are separately locked in permanently affixed compartments, except when using single unit package drug distribution systems in which the quantity stored is minimal and missing dose can be readily detected. c. On 06/13/2024 at 9:25 AM, the Surveyor asked the Administrator where controlled medications are to be stored. The Administrator said, In a locked box affixed to something permanent.
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 all residents who were seated at the same table were fed at the same time to promote resident dignity for 3 (Residents...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure all residents who were seated at the same table were fed at the same time to promote resident dignity for 3 (Residents #7, #14, and #27) of 3 sampled residents. The findings are: 1. A review of the Order Summary revealed Resident #7 had diagnoses of Alzheimer disease, and cognitive communication deficit. A review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/03/2024 revealed Resident #7 scored a 3 (severe cognitive impairment) on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS). A review of the Care Plan revealed Resident #7 was able to feed self after set up. 2. A review of the Order Summary revealed Resident #14 had diagnoses of stroke, aphasia, and hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting the right dominant side. A review of the Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 05/20/2024 revealed Resident #14 scored a 7 (severe cognitive impairment) on a BIMS. A review of the Care Plan revealed Resident #14 required extensive assistance of one person and can hold and eat fingers foods. 3. A review of the Order Summary revealed Resident #27 had diagnoses of dementia, cognitive communication deficit, and dysphagia. A review of the Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 05/23/2024 revealed Resident #27 had a Staff Assessment for Mental Status (SAMS) performed which revealed the resident's cognitive skills for daily decision making were severely impaired. A review of the Care Plan revealed Resident #27 was able to hold finger foods and needed assistance with the rest of meal. On 06/11/2024 at 12:20 PM, the Surveyor observed the residents were seated around the assist table. A staff member was assisting Resident #14 at the end of the table, to the left was Resident #7 and to the right was Resident #27. The Surveyor observed Resident #7 and Resident #27 kept looking over at Resident #14's lunch tray. The Surveyor observed Resident #14 was being assisted with chocolate ice cream and chocolate milk. On 06/11/2024 at 12:25 PM, during an interview, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 stated that this is where the residents usually sits at, and now that I think about it, they should be seated at a different table. CNA #1 then stated that if these residents are hungry, they are watching this resident eat and they do not have any. CNA #1 stated that I would feel terrible absolutely terrible. On 06/12/2024 at 11:24 AM, during an interview with the Administrator, she stated that the whole table is to be served on a normal day to day basis. Yesterday, Resident #14 had an appointment and had to be fed early. The Administrator then stated that this could be a dignity issue when eating in front of another resident. A review of the policy Dignity stated, Policy Statement: Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances his or her sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, and feelings of self-worth and self-esteem .
Apr 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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 showers were regularly provided to maintain good hygiene for 2 (Resident #17 and #18) of 16 (#1, #2, #3, #8, #15, #17,...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure showers were regularly provided to maintain good hygiene for 2 (Resident #17 and #18) of 16 (#1, #2, #3, #8, #15, #17, #18, #19, #20, #21, # 22, #23, #26, # 27, #31, #34) sampled residents who required some assistance from staff for showers. This failed practice had the potential to affect 37 residents who required some assistance with bathing/showers according to a list provided by the Administrator on 04/14/23. The findings are: 1. Resident #17 had diagnoses of Unspecified Fracture of Shaft of Right Ulna, Subsequent Encounter for Closed Fracture with Routine Healing, Pain in the Right Wrist, Need for Assistance with Personal Care and Other Abnormalities of Gait and Mobility. An admission Medicare 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/24/23 documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, (a score of 13-15 indicates cognitively intact). She required extensive assistance of two persons for toilet use and personal hygiene, extensive assistance of one person for bed mobility, toilet use and dressing, physical assistance of one person for bathing, supervision after setting up for eating, and was occasionally incontinent of bladder and always continent of bowel. a. The Care Plan with a revision date of 04/10/23 documented, The resident has an ADL [Activities of Daily Living] self-care performance deficit r/t [related to] recent fx [fracture] of ulna .Need for Assist with Personal Care .The resident requires (extensive assistance) by (1) staff with showering [2-3 X weekly] and as necessary . b. On 04/10/23 at 11:30 am., Resident #17 was lying in her bed resting. The Surveyor asked if she had any concerns with her care and she stated, I've only had 2 showers since I've been here, and I had to ask for both of them. The Surveyor asked if she had ever complained to anyone. She stated, No, they will probably say I refuse. I do refuse Physical Therapy sometimes because I'm tired or hurting and want to go back to my room. c. On 04/13/23 at 10:38 am., Resident #17 was lying in her bed, resting with her eyes closed. She had on the same shirt that she had worn the day before. d. On 04/14/23 at 9:00 am., Resident #17 was lying in her bed. The Surveyor asked if she had received her showers this week. She stated, Yes, I've gotten 2 this week. I was told that I was supposed to get another one today and I asked if I could get it tomorrow instead. The Surveyor asked if she was told she can get her shower tomorrow instead of today. She stated, I was told that I need to get one today. I asked her why I have to get one today, when I begged for a shower before. 2. Resident #18 had diagnoses of Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following Nontraumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage affecting Left Non-Dominant side, Atherosclerotic Heart Disease of Native Coronary Artery without Angina Pectoris and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Hyperglycemia. An admission Medicare 5-day MDS with an ARD of (03/15/23) documented a BIMS score of 14, (a score of 13-15 indicates cognitively intact). He required Extensive assistance of one person for bed mobility, transfer, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene, physical assistance of one for bathing, supervision after setting up for eating, and was always continent of bladder and bowel. a. On 04/10/23 at 11:30 am., Resident #18 was seated in his wheelchair out in the 300 Hall. The Surveyor asked if he had any concerns about his care. He stated I've been here about 2 months and have only had 3 showers. My shower days are Tuesday, Thursday and Saturdays. b. On 04/12/23 at 8:30 am., Resident #18 was seated in his wheelchair at the 300 Hall door preparing to go outside and smoke. He had on different clothes than the previous 2 days. The Surveyor asked if he had received a shower on his scheduled day [Tuesday]. He stated, No, I was supposed to get one yesterday, but I didn't. c. On 04/12/23 at 11:00 am., the Surveyor asked the Nursing Consultant for Resident #17's Bathing Task Sheet. At 03:49 pm, the Administrator brought Witness Statements from 2 Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) #3 and #2, and 2 Registered Nursing Assistants (RNAs) #1 and #2 that documented, Resident #17 gets regular showers when she chooses. There was a problem with the [Facility Computer Software] and they didn't get charted. The Administrator stated, When I realized that we didn't have any bathing tasks documented, I went and asked the CNAs how showers were documented. They stated, there wasn't any way to document them. I had them write up a witness form stating that residents received showers. That part of the [Facility Computer Software] has now been fixed so they can document in it. d. On 04/14/23 at 8:51 am., Resident #18 was seated in his wheelchair beside the door in the 300 Hall. He had on different clothes than yesterday. The Surveyor asked if he received a shower yesterday. He stated, Yes, I got one after my 2:30 smoke break. I was told that my name is on the list for Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday and that I will be getting showers now on those days. The Surveyor asked if he ever refused a shower/bath. He stated, Never. 3. On 04/14/23 at 9:20 am., the Surveyor asked CNA #4, Who is responsible for giving resident showers? She stated, The CNAs are. The Surveyor asked, After resident receives a shower, is it documented anywhere? She stated, Yes, we have shower sheets we document on and put it in [Facility Computer Software]. The Surveyor asked, How long have you been documenting on showers sheets and in the [Facility Computer Software]? She stated, We just started in [Facility Computer Software] but we have had the shower sheets for a while. The Surveyor asked if Residents #17 or #18 ever refuse showers. She stated, Resident #17 will refuse but will usually give in and Resident #18 has refused before. 4. On 04/14/23 at 9:25 am., the Surveyor asked RNA #2 if she was familiar with Residents #17 and #18. She stated, Yes. The Surveyor asked, Who is responsible for giving showers to residents? She stated, The girls working the floor that day. The Surveyor asked if the showers were documented anywhere. She stated, We were documenting them in [Facility Computer Software], but it was messed up for a couple of months and we couldn't use it. The Surveyor asked if it was written down on paper or in a book. She stated, No, they would tell one of the nurses, and the nurse would document it. 5. On 04/14/23 at 9:33 am., the Surveyor asked Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 if she was familiar with Residents #17 and #18. She stated, Yes. The Surveyor asked if they ever refused showers. She stated, Resident #17 does but I'm not aware of Resident #18 ever refusing. 6. On 04/14/23 at 9:58 am., the Surveyor asked the Director of Nursing (DON), Who is responsible for giving the residents showers? She stated, The CNAs. The Surveyor asked, Where are the showers documented? The DON stated, In the [Facility Computer Software] and I have implemented this week a shower sheet, a body audit sort of, that has date, shower/bed bath given or refused. They take it to the nurse and the nurse will then attempt to get resident to take shower. If still refuses, they document it in the [Facility Computer Software]. 7. The facility policy titled Bath, Shower/Tub and Procedure, provided by the DON on 04/14/23 at 10:25 am documented, Purpose .The purposes of this procedure are to promote cleanliness .to observe the condition of the resident's skin .Documentation 1. The date and time the shower/tub bath was performed .5. If the resident refused .
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 that dietary staff washed their hands before handling clean equipment or food items to prevent potential food borne illness for the re...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that dietary staff washed their hands before handling clean equipment or food items to prevent potential food borne illness for the residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen. This failed practice had the potential to affect 36 residents who received meals from the kitchen (total census: 37) according to the list provided by the Dietary Supervisor dated 04/13/23. The findings are: a. On 04/10/23 at 10:36 AM., Dietary Employee (DE) #1 pushed a cart with an iced tea container on it towards the tea maker. She removed the iced tea container from the cart and placed it on the tea maker. Without washing her hands, she picked up the bowls from the clean dish rack and placed them on a shelf with her fingers inside of them. b. On 04/10/23 at 11:28 AM., DE #1 pushed a cart towards the steam table. Without washing her hands, she picked up the bowls to be used in portioning the dessert to the residents for lunch. She placed them on the trays with her fingers inside of them. c. On 04/10/23 at 11:54 AM., DE #2 emptied a bag of cake mix into a bowl. She threw the empty bag in the trash can and pushed it down with her bare hands. She picked up a pan and placed it on the counter with her fingers inside of it. When she was ready to pour the cake batter into the pan, the Surveyor stopped her and asked, What should you have done after touching dirty objects and before handling clean equipment? She stated, I should have washed my hands. d. On 04/10/23 at 12:03 PM., DE #3 turned on the food preparation sink faucet, contaminating her hands. She picked up glasses by their rims and filled each glass with water and placed them on the trays to be served to the residents for lunch. She did not wash her hands before touching the glasses. At 3:56 PM, the Surveyor asked, What should you have done after touching dirty objects and before handling clean equipment? She stated, I should have washed my hands. e. On 04/10/23 at 12:25 PM., DE #1 was on the line assisting with lunch. She picked up the condiments, a milk carton and the supplements and placed them on trays. Without washing her hands, she picked up beverage glasses by their rims and placed them on the meal trays to be served to the residents for lunch. The Surveyor asked, What should you have done after touching dirty objects and before handling clean equipment? She stated, Washed my hands. f. The facility policy titled, Preventing Foodborne Illnesses-Employee Hygiene and Sanitary Practices, provided by the Dietary Supervisor on 04/13/23 at 9:00 AM documented, Employees must wash their hands after engaging in other activities that contaminate the hands.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
  • "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

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 6 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $14,069 in fines. Above average for Arkansas. Some compliance problems on record.
  • • 67% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 71/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is Rector Nursing And Rehab's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Rector Nursing And Rehab Staffed?

CMS rates RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 67%, which is 20 percentage points above the Arkansas average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.

What Have Inspectors Found at Rector Nursing And Rehab?

State health inspectors documented 6 deficiencies at RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 5 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 Rector Nursing And Rehab?

RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB 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 ANTHONY & BRYAN ADAMS, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 70 certified beds and approximately 42 residents (about 60% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in RECTOR, Arkansas.

How Does Rector Nursing And Rehab Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (67%) 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 Rector Nursing And Rehab?

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?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the facility's high staff turnover rate.

Is Rector Nursing And Rehab Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB 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 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 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 Rector Nursing And Rehab Stick Around?

Staff turnover at RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB is high. At 67%, the facility is 20 percentage points above the Arkansas average of 46%. 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 Rector Nursing And Rehab Ever Fined?

RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB has been fined $14,069 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Arkansas average of $33,220. 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 Rector Nursing And Rehab on Any Federal Watch List?

RECTOR NURSING AND REHAB 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.