CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Crestpark Stuttgart, LLC has received a Trust Grade of D, indicating below-average conditions with some concerning issues. They rank #61 out of 218 nursing homes in Arkansas, placing them in the top half, and are the only option in Arkansas County, ranked #1 of 3. The facility is improving, having reduced its number of issues from 17 in 2024 to just 1 in 2025. Staffing is a strong point, with a 5-star rating and a turnover rate of 35%, significantly lower than the state average, but the facility has incurred $28,978 in fines, which is higher than 91% of Arkansas facilities, suggesting ongoing compliance issues. Notably, there were critical incidents, including a resident being involuntarily secluded and a failure to prevent falls that led to serious injuries, highlighting significant areas for improvement alongside their better staffing and overall star ratings.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Arkansas
- #61/218
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 35% turnover. Near Arkansas's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $28,978 in fines. Lower than most Arkansas facilities. Relatively clean record.
- 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 ⚠ Watch
- 34 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (35%)
13 points below Arkansas average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
11pts below Arkansas avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 34 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff performed proper hand hygiene when feeding residents, affecting 4 (Resident #18, #34, #36, #39) of 4 residents observed that r...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
2 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
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the call light was placed within reach of 3 (Residents #3, #4 and #5) of five sampled residents to enable them to call...
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 F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interview and record review the facility failed to keep heating and air ventilation clean to prevent pote...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2024
15 deficiencies
2 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Deficiency F0603
(Tag F0603)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident remained free of involuntary seclusion by staff and to ensure all other residents were protected from further involuntary...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(J)
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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an effective fall prevention program that inclu...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0554
(Tag F0554)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were not self-administered without a physician order and the interdisciplinary team (IDT) assessed the resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the requirements of their abuse prohibition policy were followed to protect 1 of 1 (Resident # 34) sampled resident from further abu...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on an interview and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly prevent possible further abuse for 1 Resident (Resident #34) who was involuntarily secluded and possible abuse for all other ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · 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 a residents ' s representative was notified in writing of res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the bed hold policy was provided for a transfer to the hospi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure nail care services were regularly provided to promote good personal hygiene and grooming for 1 (Resident #18) of 9 (Res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing was dated to reduce the potential for respiratory complications and failed to ensure Oxygen in Use signag...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0865
(Tag F0865)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement program (QAPI) Committee developed and implemented appropriate plans of action to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0567
(Tag F0567)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident trust account received interest monthly based on the balance in the account. This failed practice affected 2 Residents ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
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 care plans were reviewed and revised at least quarterly and / or when a resident ' s care needs changed, to include oxygen use for 1...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Surveyor: [NAME], [NAME]
Based on observation of the medication pass on 01/10/24 at 12:00 noon and 01/11/24 at 8 AM, record revi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were not left in resident rooms for 1 of 1 (Resident #7) sampled residents who was observed with medication...
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 that meats were stored properly during the thawing process to prevent the potential for food borne illness for resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
16 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff avoided placing signs that included residents' care information regarding personal care needs, in areas where they could be see...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0583
(Tag F0583)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation of the 8:00 AM Medication Pass on 01/05/23, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Medication Administration Record (MAR) binder was closed when out of th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0604
(Tag F0604)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #45) of 1 sampled resident was free from physical restraints, as evidenced by her wheelchair being physica...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation of the 8:00 AM Medication Pass on 01/05/23, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Medication Cart was locked to prevent accidents when the cart was out of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0808
(Tag F0808)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure physician ordered diets were followed for 1 (Resident #29) of 6 (Residents #11, #23, #29, #32, #38 and #305) sampled r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Physician Ordered medication with specific times were administered as ordered for 1 (Resident #13) of 1 sampled resident. The findi...
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 ensure floor tiles were maintained and free from crac...
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 catheter drainage bag was maintained off the floor and in a privacy bag to prevent the risk for infection and to mai...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0697
(Tag F0697)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure physician ordered pain medications with specific times were administered as ordered for 1 (Resident #19)
of 25 (Reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation of the 4:00 PM medication pass on 01/05/23 with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1, record review, and inter...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident preferences were followed to encourage the amount residents consume for 2 (Residents #30 and #37) of 27 (Resi...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure pureed food items were blended to a smooth, lump-free, pudding-like consistency to minimize the risk of choking or oth...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0868
(Tag F0868)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all required members of the QAA (Quality Assessment and Assurance) committee attended required quarterly Quality Assessment and Ass...
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
Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure all laundry was handled, transported, and processed wearing non-contaminated personal protective equipment (PPE) to help minimize the...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility's Antibiotic Stewardship Program was maintained to include protocols to ensure residents who required antibiotics rece...
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 foods stored in the kitchen freezer, refrigerators, and dry storage area were labeled and dated when received and/or o...
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
- • 35% turnover. Below Arkansas's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), $28,978 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 34 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $28,978 in fines. Higher than 94% of Arkansas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade D (41/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Arkansas, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc Staffed?
CMS rates CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 35%, compared to the Arkansas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc?
State health inspectors documented 34 deficiencies at CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 32 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 Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc?
CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC 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 CRESTPARK, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 100 certified beds and approximately 41 residents (about 41% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in STUTTGART, Arkansas.
How Does Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc Compare to Other Arkansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arkansas, CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (35%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc?
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 I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 4-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 Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc Stick Around?
CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC has a staff turnover rate of 35%, 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 Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc Ever Fined?
CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC has been fined $28,978 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Arkansas average of $33,369. 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 Crestpark Stuttgart, Llc on Any Federal Watch List?
CRESTPARK STUTTGART, LLC 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.