SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Springdale Health and Rehabilitation Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and a poor reputation among facilities. It ranks #166 out of 218 in Arkansas, placing it in the bottom half of all nursing homes in the state, and #9 out of 12 in Washington County, meaning there are only a few local options that are better. The facility is improving, with reported issues decreasing from 9 in 2023 to 7 in 2024, but it still faces major challenges. Staffing is a concern, with a rating of 2 out of 5 stars and a high turnover rate of 66%, which is above the state average of 50%. While there have been no fines reported, which is a positive sign, the facility has had serious incidents, including a critical failure that resulted in a resident being pushed to the floor and suffering a hip fracture. Additionally, there were issues noted with food safety, such as expired items not being removed, which poses health risks for residents. Overall, while there are some improving trends, families should weigh both the strengths and weaknesses carefully when considering this facility for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Arkansas
- #166/218
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 66% 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 ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 15 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Arkansas. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 36 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)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
20pts above Arkansas avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
18 points above Arkansas average of 48%
The Ugly 36 deficiencies on record
Aug 2024
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure staff did not stand over residents who required assistance during meals for 2 (Resident #12 and Resident #60) of 2 ...
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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and policy document review, the facility failed to maintain a clean and safe environment for 3 sampled residents (Resident #13, #26, and #51).
The findings are:
A r...
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, record review, facility document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to e...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure open food items stored in the refri...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
3 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
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan was individualized to addressed appropriate care and services for activities of daily living (ADL) for 2...
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents individualize plan of care was revised to reflect the current needs of the resident and updated to include oxygen use for ...
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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were showered/bathed as scheduled to promote good personal hygiene for 5 Residents (Resident R #1, #2, #3, #...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0567
(Tag F0567)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with a trust account had access to their personal funds after business hours and on weekends. This failed practice had the...
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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents meals were removed from serving trays for 12 of 15 residents served in the dining room on the secured unit, a...
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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care was provided for 4 sampled residents (Resident #9, #14, #23, #45), for 2 sampled ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure skin assessments were performed on a consistent basis for 1 (Resident #23) sampled residents. The findings are:
On 07/...
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure personal care items and sharpened pencils were contained on the secure unit. This failed practice had the potential to e...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the nebulizer mouthpiece and medicine cup was contained after use for 1 (Resident #41) of 1 sampled resident. The find...
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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that linen and clothing is processed in a manne...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0576
(Tag F0576)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure that resident's right to receive mail on the weekend was maintained. The failed practice had the potential to affect all 91 residents w...
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 practices were utilized to prevent cross contamination during dining and food preparation. The practice had the ability to affect all 9...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2022
3 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #1) of 1 sampled resident was not pushed on the ...
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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a fall that resulted in a serious injury for 1 (Resident #1) ...
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
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a fall that resulted in a serious injury for 1 (Res #1) of 1 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2022
17 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0608
(Tag F0608)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility ' s abuse policy and procedure was implemented by not immediately reporting an allegation of a possible crime to the Ad...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to immediately report an allegation of abuse to the Administrator/Designee and reported within 2 hours to the Office of Long Term Care (OLTC) ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0645
(Tag F0645)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) was obtained for 1 (Resident #97) of 41 (Residents #3, #4, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Laboratory Services
(Tag F0770)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure laboratory (lab) services were provided as ordered by the physician in order to provide the physician with necessary information to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0604
(Tag F0604)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from physical restraints related to placing a resident in a Broda chair in a position to prevent st...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2.Resident #106 had diagnoses of Schizoaffective Disorder and Unspecified Dementia. The Significant Change of Condition Minimum ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
3. Resident #87 had diagnosis of Heart Failure, Pressure Ulcer of Right Hip and Muscle Weakness. The 5 Day admission MDS with an ARD of 02/02/2022 was not completed. The C section of the MDS had been ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0661
(Tag F0661)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a written discharge summary was completed that included a re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
2. Resident #74 had a diagnosis of Dementia, Anxiety and Atrial Fibrillation. The Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 1/20/22 documented on a BIMS a score of 5 (0-7 indicates severely cognitively impaired) a...
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
2. On 4/7/22 at 12:55 p.m., the following observations were made in the Laundry Department:
a. Three pair of shoes and a pair of heel protectors were sitting on top of the dryers. The Maintenance Dire...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a urinary catheter drainage tubing and bag was kept off the floor to prevent potential cross contamination that could r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered at the flow rate ordere...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure meals were prepared and served in accordance with the planned written menu to meet the nutritional needs of the residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure pureed food items were blended to a smooth, lump-free consistency to minimize the risk of choking or other complications for residents...
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, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection prevention and control practices wer...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff washed their hands before handling clean equipment or food items and failed to ensure an ice scoop holder...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents meals were not being served on disposable dinnerware. This failed practice had the potential to affect 100 re...
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?"
- "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 fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Arkansas facilities.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 36 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • Grade F (33/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 66% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Springdale Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 Springdale Center Staffed?
CMS rates SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 66%, which is 20 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 71%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Springdale Center?
State health inspectors documented 36 deficiencies at SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER during 2022 to 2024. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 34 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Springdale Center?
SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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 NHS MANAGEMENT, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 140 certified beds and approximately 113 residents (about 81% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in SPRINGDALE, Arkansas.
How Does Springdale Center Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (66%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Springdale 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?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Springdale Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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 2-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 Springdale Center Stick Around?
Staff turnover at SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER is high. At 66%, the facility is 20 percentage points above the Arkansas average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 71%. 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 Springdale Center Ever Fined?
SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER 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 Springdale Center on Any Federal Watch List?
SPRINGDALE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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.