Home / Arkansas / North Little Rock
3600 Richards Road, North Little Rock, AR 72117 · Pulaski County · (501) 955-2108
132 certified beds, about 119 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2000
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 045357 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 14, 2025, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Arkansas average is 2.7, the national average 9.2).
None of its 35 health citations since March 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.00 hours per resident per day, against 4.02 across Arkansas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.23 of those hours.
60.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Arkansas average 49.5%).
CMS links it to The Springs Arkansas, an affiliated group of 26 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 35 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to accurately develop and implement a baseline Care Plan for one (Resident #1) of one resident reviewed for baseline care planning. Specifically, the facility failed to include minimum healthcare information such as, administration of an anticoagulant and the resident being at risk for falls, necessary to ensure the facility staff provided continuity of care, staff communication, resident safety, and prevention of adverse events for Resident #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on facility document review, interviews, facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a thorough facility assessment for the staffing required for day/evening/weekend coverage of resident needs and failed to formulate a plan for staff recruitment and retention to meet the needs of the residents when completing their facility assessment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure personal care was provided for two (Resident #106 and Resident #126) of two residents reviewed for activities of daily living.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a glucometer was cleansed according to the manufacturer's guidelines for two of two glucometers observed being used to perform blood sugar checks; and failed to ensure wound care was performed using proper infection control measures for one (Resident #126) of one resident observed during wound care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure necessary equipment was maintained in a clean and sanitary state for one (Resident #122) of three residents reviewed, specifically not ensuring a resident’s wheelchair was free of dirt and debris.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews it was determined that the facility failed to post the required staffing information. Specifically, the facility failed to post the facility census and actual hours worked by licensed personnel.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure an abuse allegation was reported to law enforcement for one (Resident #108) of five sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) was accurate and complete to facilitate the ability to plan and provide necessary care and services for 1 (Resident #1) sampled resident whose MDS was reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, facility document review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan addressed and individualized appropriate care and services for 1 (Resident #3) of 1 sampled resident, reviewed for care plan accuracy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure food items stored in the refrigerator and storage area were covered or sealed to maintain freshness and prevent potential cross contamination of food and beverages; expired food items were promptly removed/discarded by the expiration or use by dates; kitchen vents cleaned; provide a sanitary environment for food preparation; floors, kitchen walls, door frames and baseboards were free of rotten wood, chipped floor tiles, debris, rust, and dirt; 3 of 3 ice machines were maintained in a clean and sanitary condition to prevent food and beverage contamination; and staff washed their hands and changed gloves between dirty and clean tasks and before handling clean equipment or food items to minimize the potential for contaminating food items. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that privacy and dignity was maintained for 2 (Resident #9 #13) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews the facility failed to accurately assess the comprehensive assessment for 2 (Resident #52, #90) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 Resident #104 of 3 (Resident #54, #91, and #104) sampled residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (AD)s nails were clean and that they received a shave.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure hydration was available at all times for 1(Resident #69) of 2 (Resident #69 and Resident #214) sampled residents reviewed for hydration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to provide a clean oxygen tubing to 1 Resident #97 of 2 (Resident #32 and #97) sampled residents on oxygen therapy, and the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing was placed in a storage bag for 1 Resident #32 of 2 (Resident #32, and Resident #97) sampled residents on oxygen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure bed rails were not used for 1 Resident #104 of 2 (Resident #90 and Resident #104) sampled residents reviewed for accidents without a side rail assessment to prevent the potential for accidents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a dose reduction was implemented for 1 (Resident #82) of 5 (Resident #10, #30, #37, 79, and #82) sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure meals were prepared and served according to the planned written menu to meet the nutritional needs of the residents for 2 of 2 meals observed. This failed practice had the potential to affect 27 residents who had mechanical soft diets. 7 residents received pureed diet from 1 of 1 kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an effective pest control program was maintained to keep the facility free of pests.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to complete a Self-administration safety screen for 1 (Resident #27) sampled resident to ensure that the resident could safely administer medication, there were no drug interactions between prescribed medication and medication at the bedside, Resident did not over/under dose, and/or the medications did not have a negative effect on any medical illness the Resident ise currently was diagnosed with.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Care Plan for 1 (Resident #9) sampled resident was revised to reflect that the resident had an indwelling catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper incontinence care was provided to 1 (Resident #9) sampled resident with an indwelling urinary catheter and the catheter was placed in a manner to prevent possible dislodging and/or trauma to the resident. This failed practice had the potential to affect 2 (Resident #9, #13) sample of 4 Residents on 300 hall with indwelling catheters.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a call light was within reach for 4 (Resident #19, #32, #45, and #82) of 5 (Resident #32, #45, #82, #17, and #19) sampled residents reviewed for call lights.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food items stored in the refrigerator/freezer were covered, sealed and dated; ceiling vents and lights were maintained in clean, sanitary conditions for food preparation and to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen; expired food items were promptly removed/discarded by the expiration or use by dates; foods were dated when received to ensure first in, first out usage to prevent potential for food bone illness; leftover foods were used to maintain food quality; dietary staff washed their hands before handling clean equipment or food items to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the call light was placed within reach to ensure the resident could call for assistance when needed for 1 (Resident #68) of 21 (Residents #6, #17, #24, #31, #40, #43, #45, #50, #53, #68, #72, #73, #77, #79, #83, #84, #88, #94, #97, #104 #518) sampled residents who were able to use the call light to call for staff assistance. This failed practice had the potential to affect 48 residents who were able to use the call light as documented on a list provided by the Administrator on 03/02/23.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to complete a Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) within 14 days of the identification of a decline in two or more activities of daily living for 2 (Residents #45 and #49) of 27 (Residents #12, #17, #22, #26, #27, #31, #45, #49, #50, #53, #56, #59, #72, #73, #77, #80, #83, #88, #94, #95, #97, #104, #116, #118, #268, #271 and #518) sampled residents whose MDSs were reviewed. This failed practice had the potential to affect all 103 residents who resided in the facility as documented on the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents provided by the Administrator on 02/27/23 at 1:15PM.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was completed prior to admission to ensure the resident received the needed care and services in the most appropriate setting for 2 (Residents #12 and #26) of 14 (Residents #2, #5, #12, #26, #27, #31, #45, #49, #50, #64, #72, #77, #97 and #104) sampled residents who had a diagnosis of mental illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Care Plan for residents who had a decline in activities of daily living (ADL) was reviewed and revised for 2 (Residents #45 and #49) of 27 (Residents #12, #17, #22, #26, #27, #31, #45, #49, #50, #53, #56, #59, #72, #73, #77, #80, #83, #88, #94, #95, #97, #104, #116, #118, #268, #271 and #518) sampled residents whose Care Plans were reviewed. This failed practice had the potential to affect all 103 residents who resided in the facility as documented on the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents provided by the Administrator on 02/27/23 at 1:15 PM.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the transparent semipermeable membrane dressing on a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) line was changed according to professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #271) of 2 (Residents #26 and #271) sampled residents who had Physician Orders for a PICC line as documented on a list provided by the Administrator on 02/28/23 at 3:59 p.m.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation of the 8:00 AM medication pass on 02/28/23, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% was maintained to prevent potential complications for 1 (Resident #5) of 3 residents observed during the 8:00 AM medication pass. The medication error rate was 7.41% based on observation of 27 medications, and a total of 2 errors detected. This failed practice had the potential to affect 103 residents in the facility as documented on the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents provided by the Administrator on 02/27/23 at 1:15 PM.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored and labeled properly for 2 (Residents #4 and #40) of 20 sampled residents who resided on the 300 Hall. This failed practice had the potential to affect 46 residents who resided on the 300 Hall as documented on a list provided by the Chief Nursing Officer on 03/01/23 at 11:34 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure meals were prepared and served according to the planned written menu to meet the nutritional needs of the residents for 1 of 2 meals observed. This failed practice had the potential to affect 65 residents' who received regular diets from 1 of 1 kitchen according to a list provided by the Dietary Supervisor on 02/28/23.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 who required pureed diets for 2 of 2 meals observed. This failed practice had the potential to affect 6 residents who received pureed diets, as documented on the Diet List provided by the Dietary Supervisor on 2/27/2023.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a nurse changed contaminated gloves and performed hand hygiene during administration of medication via an enteral tube for 1 (Resident #59) of 3 (Residents #59, #95 and #268) sampled residents who receive medication via an enteral tube as documented on a list provided by the Chief Nursing Officer on 03/01/23 at 11:34 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all staff COVID-19 vaccinations, were accurately tracked, documented, and updated timely with complete primary vaccinations, approved, pending medical or religious exemptions, or temporary delay per the Center for Disease Control (CDC) per the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) COVID-19 Health Care Staff Vaccination regulations QSO.
2 fire safety citations on file: 1 on May 8, 2024, 1 on March 3, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Arkansas | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.00 | 4.02 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.23 | 0.41 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.42 | 3.45 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.79 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.98 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 60.5% | 49.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 64.3% | 44.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.73 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 4.23 on weekdays and 3.42 on weekends, 19% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.01 in April to June 2025 to 4.00 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.00 | 0.23 | 4.23 | 3.42 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 119 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.11 | 0.26 | 4.38 | 3.42 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 115 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.14 | 0.37 | 4.43 | 3.43 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 118 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.01 | 0.38 | 4.31 | 3.24 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 120 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Arkansas, Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.05 | 0.40 | 4.28 | 3.47 | 2.0% | 0.1% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arkansas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $16.55 | $14.52 to $17.34 | 17,260 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $27.22 | $23.82 to $29.43 | 10,010 |
| Registered nurses | $37.95 | $32.04 to $43.40 | 29,400 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Arkansas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.6 | 9.5 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.6 | 3.9 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.8 | 10.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.9 | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.1 | 10.9 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 29.1 | 24.1 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 8.8 | 12.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.2 | 2.0 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Premier at the Springs's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (47.9% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
47.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Arkansas: 7 better, 25 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 84 eligible stays.
9.8% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Arkansas: 0 better, 3 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 112 eligible stays.
7.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Arkansas: 0 better, 7 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 79 eligible stays.
44.4% this home
Median of homes: Arkansas64.4% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 45 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Arkansas0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 112 residents counted.
5.7% this home
Median of homes: Arkansas2.7% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 112 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Arkansas98.8% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 5 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: PREMIER WELLNESS LLC. CMS links this home to The Springs Arkansas, a group of 26 nursing homes averaging 3.3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Black River Healthcare LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 03/31/2022 | |
| Hayes, Robin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Thessing, Jeffrey | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/31/2022 | |
| Black River Healthcare LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/20/2025 | |
| Richards Road Realty LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/31/2022 | |
| Hayes, Robin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Thessing, Jeffrey | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/31/2022 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Arkansas. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.