9209 Dollarway Road, White Hall, AR 71602 · Jefferson County · (870) 247-0800
120 certified beds, about 107 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2002
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 045372 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 17, 2025, inspectors cited 4 health deficiencies (the Arkansas average is 2.7, the national average 9.2).
None of its 35 health citations since November 2022 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 3.15 hours per resident per day, against 4.02 across Arkansas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.42 of those hours.
53.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Arkansas average 49.5%).
CMS links it to The Blossoms Rehab & Nursing Center, an affiliated group of 23 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a call light was kept in reach to ensure a resident had a means to call for assistance for 1 (Resident #296) of 1 resident sampled for accommodation of needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure incontinent care was provided in a timely fashion and in accordance with the resident ' s needs for one (Resident #247) of one sampled resident dependent on facility staff for incontinent care.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was re-assessed for safe smoking behaviors before being allowed to smoke after the admission smoking evaluation indicated the resident did not smoke for 1 (Resident #91) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for smoking.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure staff changed gloves and performed proper hand hygiene during incontinent care for 1 (Resident #247) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for incontinent care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interview, the facility failed to ensure deep fryer was free of debris to prevent potential cross contamination, food items stored in the freezer or refrigerator were sealed, covered and dated, expired food items were promptly removed /discarded by the expiration or use by dates, and foods were dated as when received to ensure first in and first out usage to prevent the potential for food borne illness, Dish washing air vent was cleaned, wall tiles were free of paint peelings, baseboard were free of missing and replaced, deep fryer and ice machine were free of dirt, rust, and grease and 1 of 2 ice machines was maintained in clean and sanitary condition to prevent food and beverage contamination, staff washed their hands between dirty and clean tasks and before handling clean equipment to minimize the potential for contaminating food items for residents who [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure that a self-inflicted incident was reported to the Office of Long-Term Care. This failed practice affected 1 of 1 Residents (R#31).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure care plans were reviewed and revised as least quarterly and / or when residents' care needs changed, as evidenced by failure to revise the plan of care to address limited range of motion in the left hand and the use of Oxygen to ensure staff were aware of the necessary care, assessments and services required for 1 (Resident #59) of 1 (Resident #59) sampled resident who had limited range of motion in the left hand and for 1 (Resident #63) of 1 (Resident #63) sampled resident who used Oxygen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure personal hygiene and nail care were routinely maintained and all areas of the skin were cleansed during incontinent care to promote good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (Resident #53) of x (Residents #53 .) sampled residents who required staff assistance for shaving, 2 (Residents #53 and #59) of x (Residents #53, #59 ) sampled residents who required staff assistance with nail care and 1 (Residents #59) of x (Residents #53 #59 ) sampled residents who were dependent on staff for incontinent care as documented on lists provided by the Administrator on 2/8/24.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a humidifier bottle was changed per the Physician's orders and that Oxygen was administered at the prescribed flow rate to decrease the potential for Respiratory complications for 1 (Resident #63) of 3 (Residents #2, #19 and #63) sampled residents who had a Physician's order for Oxygen (O2) as documented on a listed provided by the Administrator on 2/7/24 at 11:13 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5 percent (%)for 1 (Resident #14) of 3 (Residents #14, #16 and #183) residents observed during the medication pass. The medication error rate was 14.81% based on observation of 27 medications administered and 4 errors detected.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure meals were served at temperatures that were acceptable to the residents to improve palatability and encourage good nutritional intake during 2 of 2 meals observed. The failed practices had the potential to affect 22 residents who received their meal trays in the their rooms on the 100 Hall, 10 residents who received their meal trays in the room on the 200 Hall, 11 residents who received their meal trays on the 300 Hall, 13 residents who received their meal trays in their room on the 400 Hall, 21 residents who received their meat trays in the room on 500 Hall and 4 residents who received their meal trays in their room on 600 Hall, as documented on a list provided by the Dietary Supervisor on 02/06/2024 10:10 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that pureed food items were blended to a smooth, lump free consistency to minimize the risk of choking or other complications for those residents who required pureed diets for 1 of 1 meal observed. The failed practice had the potential to affect 4 residents who received pureed diets, as documented on the list Dietary Supervisor provided by the Food Service Supervisor on 02/06/2024
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure trash was properly contained within 1 of 1 dumpster, to minimize the presence of foul odors and decrease the potential for pest infestation. The failed practice had the potential to affect all the residents who resided in the facility, as documented on the list provided by the Dietary Supervisor on 2/6/2024 at 010:10 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to notify the Ombudsman required for 1 (Resident #31) of 6 (Residents #11, #14, #31, #59, #64, and #53) sampled residents who were transferred to the hospital in the last month.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) was coded accurately to reflect the resident's nutritional status for 1 sampled resident (R#37).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure services were provided to minimize the potential for further decline in range of motion (ROM) for 1 (Resident #59) of 3 (Residents #16, #31 and #59) sampled residents who had limited range of motion as documented on a list provided by the Administrator on 2/7/24 at 11:13 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that interventions that were care planed were utilized to prevent potential accident hazards as possible by continuing to fall for 1 of 1 Resident (#11) 1 sampled resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were allowed to flow by gravity through a Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) Tube to decrease the potential for gastric complications for 1 (Resident #16) of 1 (Resident 16) sampled resident whose medications were administered through a PEG Tube.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure proper hand hygiene was performed while providing incontinent care to decrease the potential for the spread of bacteria and promote good hygiene for 1 (Resident #59) of 1 sampled resident who received incontinent care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored and administered appropriately at the bedside, and failed to ensure medication was not sent to the kitchen on food trays.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure dignity was maintained by providing privacy during incontinent care for 1 (Resident #4) of 1 sampled resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was warm when served to residents to prevent germs and bacteria growth, and appealing taste to the residents. This failed practice had the potential to affect 76 residents that eat from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure wound care was performed as ordered for one (R#5) of six (R#1, #2, #3, #4, #5 and #6) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff washed their hands and changed gloves before handling food items to prevent the potential for cross contamination for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen and 1 of 2 ice machines were maintained in a clean and sanitary condition to prevent potential contamination of resident fluids for residents who received ice in their rooms. These failed practices had the potential to affect 19 residents on the 100 Hall, 12 residents on the 200 Hall, 10 residents on the 300 Hall, 12 residents on the 400 Hall, 17 residents on the 500 Hall, 3 residents the 600 Hall and 3 residents on the 700 Hall who received ice in their rooms, (Total Census: 76 ) according to the list provided by the Dietary Supervisor on 11/10/2022 at 8:39 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents' decisions as to whether they desired to have, or did have, an advanced directive, were documented in a prominent part of the clinical record and correct to ensure their wishes were known regarding acceptance or rejection of any life-sustaining treatments in the event of their incapacitation for 2 (Residents #51 and #55) of 2 sampled residents whose advance directives were reviewed. This failed practice had the potential to affect all 76 residents in the facility as documented on the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents provided by the Administrator on [DATE] at 9:10 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's room did not have a strong urine odor from the catheter bag dripping for 1 (Resident #29) of 1 sampled resident who had a urinary catheter. This failed practice had the potential to affect 3 residents in the facility who had urinary catheters according to the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents provided by the Administrator on 11/8/22 at 9:10 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed in a timely manner for 1 (Resident #55) of 9 (Residents #15, #27, #34, #42, #55, #70, #74, #377 and #379) sampled residents who were admitted within the last 90 days and 1 (Resident #70) of 5 (Residents #5, #34, #15, #377 and #70) sampled residents who were discharged within the last 90 days.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflected the use of a restraint for 1 (Resident #19) of 1 sampled resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident clothing was regularly changed and wasn't worn for 2 to 5 consecutive days to promote cleanliness and good personal hygiene for 2 (Residents #34 and #51), failed to ensure residents were regularly shaved for 1 (Resident #51) and nail care was regularly provided to promote good personal hygiene for 2 (Residents #56 and #377) of 21 (Residents #2, #5, #7, #8, #13, #15, #16, #17, #19, #20, #27, #29, #34, #42, #47, #48, #51, #56, #377, #379, and #380) sampled residents who were dependent for nail care and/or personal hygiene according to the lists provided by the Regional Consultant on 11/09/22 at 4:07 pm.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the environment was as free from accidents and hazards as possible, as evidenced by failure to store potentially hazard chemicals in a secure location to prevent potential access by cognitively impaired and or mobile residents on the 400 Hall. This failed practice had the potential to affect 13 residents who resided on the 400 Hall and were ambulatory or wheelchair mobile as documented on a list provided by the Administrator on 11/10/22 at 12:05 PM.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a physician's order was obtained for the administration and use of oxygen and a Trilogy machine to prevent potential complications for 1 (Resident #51) of 8 (Residents #5, #7, #16, #19, #27, #34, #51 and #380) sampled residents who received oxygen and 1 (Resident #51) of 1 sampled resident who used a Trilogy machine. This failed practice had the potential to affect 16 residents residing in the facility who used oxygen and 1 resident in the facility who used a Trilogy machine according to the list provided by the Administrator on 11/09/22 at 3:50 PM.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's drug regimen review was followed up on according to facility policy and Resident Assessment Instructions guidelines for 1 (Resident #377) of 1 sampled resident who received Lithium.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet the needs of a resident who smoked tobacco for 1 (Resident #377) of 5 (Residents #8, #19, #42, #74 and #377) sampled residents who smoked.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure toenail care was regularly provided to promote good foot care for 1 (Resident #47) of 21 (Residents #2, #5, #7, #8, #13, #15, #16, #17, #19, #20, #27, #29, #34, #42, #47, #48, #51, #56, #377, #379, and #380) sampled residents who were dependent for nail care/personal hygiene according to the lists provided by the Regional Consultant on 11/09/22 at 4:07 PM.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 residents for 1 of 2 meals observed. These failed practices had the potential to affect 52 residents who received regular diets and 17 residents who received mechanical soft diets, (Total census: 76) according to a list provided by the Dietary Supervisor on 11/10/2022.
8 fire safety citations on file: 3 on April 17, 2025, 3 on February 8, 2024, 2 on November 10, 2022.
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) | 3.15 | 4.02 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.42 | 0.41 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.94 | 3.45 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.03 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.70 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 53.1% | 49.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 72.7% | 44.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.34 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 3.23 on weekdays and 2.94 on weekends, 9% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 11.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.30 in April to June 2025 to 3.15 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 | 3.15 | 0.42 | 3.23 | 2.94 | 11.3% | 0 of 90 | 107 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.29 | 0.32 | 3.38 | 3.05 | 9.9% | 0 of 92 | 91 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.25 | 0.35 | 3.36 | 2.97 | 10.2% | 0 of 92 | 95 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.30 | 0.40 | 3.43 | 2.97 | 9.7% | 0 of 91 | 89 |
| 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 | 9.6 | 9.5 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.5 | 3.9 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.4 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.7 | 10.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.0 | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.9 | 10.9 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 20.1 | 24.1 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 15.6 | 12.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.9 | 2.0 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.4 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Blossoms at White Hall Rehab & Nursing Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (40.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
40.5% 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. 60 eligible stays.
10.3% 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. 79 eligible stays.
7.5% 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. 49 eligible stays.
50.0% 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. 28 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. 63 residents counted.
2.3% 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. 63 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. 6 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: DOLLARWAY ROAD OPERATING LLC. CMS links this home to The Blossoms Rehab & Nursing Center, a group of 23 nursing homes averaging 2.7 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aks Ar Opoc LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 01/01/2023 | |
| Schreiber, Abraham | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Morton, Donna Marie | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 04/05/2021 | |
| Scheinbaum, Shlomo | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/05/2021 |
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.