Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Arkansas Continued Care Hospital Of Jonesboro during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to maintain the dignity of two residents by not concealing their urinary fluid drainage bags in privacy bags, making them visible from the hallway. Despite staff training and policies on catheter care, these did not address privacy or dignity, leading to the deficiency. An LPN acknowledged the need for privacy bags, but the issue persisted, affecting the dignity of the residents involved.
The facility failed to develop comprehensive baseline care plans for newly admitted residents, lacking necessary instructions for effective person-centered care. Deficiencies included missing details on ADLs, specific interventions for health issues, and management of medical equipment. These omissions affected residents with various diagnoses, such as diabetes, respiratory failure, and cerebrovascular disease, highlighting systemic issues in the facility's admission process.
The facility failed to properly seal food items in the refrigerator and maintain appropriate food temperatures during meal service. Opened boxes of pork sausage and cooked eggs were not sealed, and food temperatures on a test tray were outside the acceptable range, with hot foods below 135°F and a cold salad above 41°F. A resident noted that the food could be warm, highlighting potential issues with temperature maintenance.
The facility failed to follow proper hand hygiene during wound care, lacked hands-free trash receptacles in the kitchen, and did not document water management to prevent Legionella. Additionally, a non-EPA registered cleaning solution was used, ineffective against Clostridium difficile.
The facility did not have a certified or qualified Infection Preventionist (IP) available at least 20 hours a week to manage the infection prevention program. The DON confirmed the IP was not working part-time but was available for consultation. The Infection Control Director had not completed IP training, and no documentation of prior education was provided. The Administrator also confirmed the IP was not working part-time. The facility's infection control policy aimed to reduce infections, but the lack of a qualified IP compromised this goal.
The facility failed to document and provide education on the Pneumonia vaccine for three residents over 65. The DON confirmed the absence of declination forms and stated that nurses fill out these forms upon admission.
The facility failed to document COVID-19 vaccination decisions and provide education for four out of five residents reviewed. The medical records lacked documentation of the residents' decisions to obtain or refuse the vaccine and did not show that education on the benefits and risks was provided. The DON confirmed that the facility had stopped using declination forms, leading to a systemic issue in vaccination documentation and education.
A resident's indwelling catheter drainage bag was found touching the floor, contrary to the facility's CAUTI prevention policy, which requires the bag to be secured off the floor. The LPN acknowledged the issue, and the DON could not locate a required physician's order for the catheter. The resident had diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and a Stage 4 Pressure Ulcer.
A facility failed to maintain professional standards in managing respiratory equipment for a resident with chronic respiratory failure. The CPAP nose piece was improperly stored, and there were no physician orders for the CPAP or oxygen therapy. Staff interviews revealed confusion about equipment management, and the respiratory therapist admitted to a lack of documentation for equipment changes, highlighting significant oversight in the resident's care plan.
A facility failed to conduct an entrapment risk assessment and obtain informed consent before installing side rails on a resident's bed. The resident, who was nonverbal and dependent on staff, had all four side rails up without documented assessment or consent, contrary to facility policy. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the lack of assessment and consent, citing standard care practices.
The facility did not ensure a licensed pharmacist conducted a thorough monthly drug regimen review for a resident's use of Pantoprazole Sodium (Protonix) for gastrointestinal prophylaxis. The pharmacist stated that the system prompts for high-risk medications but lacks specific dosage parameters for PPIs. Additionally, the facility could not provide a policy on medication regimen review when requested.
Failure to Maintain Resident Dignity with Urinary Fluid Collection Bags
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the dignity of two residents by not concealing their urinary fluid drainage bags in privacy bags. This deficiency was observed in two residents, Resident #203 and Resident #206, who had urinary fluid collection bags that were visible from the hallway. Resident #203, who was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 13, was observed on two occasions with her catheter drainage bag hanging from the side of her bed without a privacy bag. Similarly, Resident #206, who was nonverbal and required dependent assistance for mobility and toileting, was observed with a visible urinary fluid collection bag on two separate occasions. The facility's staff training on Peri care & Foley Care CAUTI, provided by the Director of Nursing, did not address privacy or dignity, and the CAUTI prevention policy and procedure also lacked guidance on these aspects. During an interview, an LPN acknowledged that Resident #203's catheter should have been in a privacy bag, indicating awareness of the requirement. However, the lack of implementation of privacy measures for the urinary fluid collection bags resulted in a failure to maintain the residents' dignity.
Deficiencies in Baseline Care Plans for New Admissions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement baseline care plans that included necessary instructions for providing effective person-centered care for five residents. These deficiencies were observed in the care plans of residents who were admitted within the past 30 days. The baseline care plans lacked comprehensive details such as initial goals, instructions for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), and specific interventions for identified health issues, which are crucial for meeting the residents' immediate needs upon admission. For instance, one resident with multiple diagnoses, including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and heart conditions, had a care plan that did not address the need for supervision of ADLs or interventions for significant weight loss. Another resident with chronic respiratory failure and a stage four pressure ulcer had a care plan that failed to address the size and management of an indwelling catheter, respiratory equipment maintenance, and psychosocial issues related to catheter use. Additionally, the care plan did not include physician orders for the catheter, which is a critical oversight. Other residents also experienced similar deficiencies in their care plans. One resident with a diagnosis of sepsis and diabetes had no specific wound care instructions or pain management interventions documented. Another resident with cerebral palsy and a non-pressure ulcer had no care plans for high-risk medications or ADLs. Furthermore, a resident with cerebrovascular disease and tube feeding had an incomplete care plan that did not address tube feeding management, contractures, or seizure precautions. These omissions in the baseline care plans indicate a systemic issue in the facility's admission process, potentially affecting the quality of care provided to newly admitted residents.
Improper Food Storage and Temperature Maintenance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper food storage and temperature maintenance, which could potentially lead to foodborne illness for residents. During an observation, two opened boxes of pork sausage and one opened box of cooked eggs were found in the refrigerator, covered with opaque plastic wrapping that was not sealed. The Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) acknowledged that these items should have been sealed. Additionally, food temperatures on a test tray were found to be outside the acceptable range, with hot foods like Salisbury steak and mashed potatoes measuring 119°F and 120°F, respectively, and a cold food item, a 3-bean salad, measuring 95°F. The CDM expressed concern over these findings, noting that the hot food should have been at least 135°F and the cold food should have been 41°F or less. A resident mentioned that the food could be warm, indicating a potential issue with food temperature maintenance. The facility's policy and procedure documentation stated that food and drink should be served at a safe and appetizing temperature, which was not adhered to in this instance.
Infection Control Deficiencies in Hand Hygiene, Water Management, and Cleaning Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to proper hand hygiene practices during wound care for a resident. During an observation, a treatment nurse did not wash hands before or after completing a wound dressing change. The nurse also failed to use hand sanitizer or wash hands after removing gloves and before applying new ones when transitioning from dirty to clean tasks. The Director of Nursing confirmed the correct procedure should include washing hands before and after the wound dressing change and using hand sanitizer when changing gloves. In the dietary department, the facility did not have a hands-free trash receptacle at the handwashing station in the kitchen. This oversight was acknowledged by the Certified Dietary Manager, who realized that touching the tops of trash barrels could lead to re-contamination of hands after washing. Additionally, the facility lacked a policy regarding the use of trash cans at handwashing stations. The facility also failed to provide documentation of the implementation and monitoring of a water management plan to prevent Legionella and other waterborne pathogens. The Maintenance Director admitted to not documenting the flushing of bathrooms, showers, and sinks in unoccupied rooms, which is part of the preventive measures against Legionnaires' disease. Furthermore, the facility used a cleaning solution that was not EPA-registered, which was not effective against Clostridium difficile, as confirmed by the Director of Infection Control.
Inadequate Infection Preventionist Staffing
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to employ a certified or qualified Infection Preventionist (IP) who was available at least 20 hours a week to manage the infection prevention program, which is crucial for preventing the spread of communicable diseases and infections. During the survey, it was found that the facility's Antimicrobial Stewardship Program policy did not specify the required working hours for the IP. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the designated IP was not working part-time at the facility but was available for consultation. The Infection Control Director had not completed the necessary IP training and was scheduled to attend a class in September 2024, with no documentation of prior education in infection prevention provided. The facility's Administrator also confirmed that the IP was not working part-time at the facility. A review of the facility's infection control policy from 2017 highlighted the goal of reducing health-associated infections and communicable diseases, but the lack of a qualified IP on staff compromised this objective.
Deficiency in Pneumonia Vaccine Documentation and Education
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper documentation and education regarding the Pneumonia vaccine for three out of five sampled residents over the age of 65. The facility's policy allows for the administration of the Pneumococcal and Influenza vaccines to patients aged 65 and older unless contraindicated or declined. However, the immunization records provided by the Director of Nursing (DON) did not contain documentation of the residents receiving the Pneumococcal vaccine, nor did it show that education was provided or that a signed declination was obtained. The DON confirmed that the facility no longer uses a declination form, and the responsibility for filling out these forms was assigned to the nurse upon admission.
Failure to Document COVID-19 Vaccination Decisions and Education
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper documentation of COVID-19 vaccination decisions and education for four out of five residents reviewed for immunization administration. The medical records did not include documentation of the residents' decisions to obtain or refuse the COVID-19 vaccine, nor did they show that the residents or their representatives were provided with education regarding the benefits and potential risks associated with the vaccine. This deficiency was identified during a review of the facility's immunization records provided by the Director of Nursing (DON), which lacked documentation for Residents #202, #203, #204, and #206. During an interview, the DON confirmed that the facility had stopped using declination forms and that the nurses were no longer filling them out upon admission. This lack of documentation and education had the potential to affect all five residents reviewed, indicating a systemic issue in the facility's vaccination documentation and education process.
Improper Positioning of Catheter Drainage Bag and Missing Physician Order
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper positioning of an indwelling catheter drainage bag for a resident, which was observed touching the floor. This deficiency was identified during a medication pass observation when the urinary drainage bag was found hanging from a lowered side rail, contrary to the facility's CAUTI prevention policy. The policy mandates that the drainage bag should be secured to the bed frame and not touch the floor to prevent infection. The LPN present acknowledged the issue, confirming that the bag should not be in contact with the floor as it poses a risk of infection. Additionally, the Director of Nursing (DON) was unable to locate a physician's order for the indwelling catheter, which is required for its use. The resident involved had been admitted with diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with complications and a Stage 4 Pressure Ulcer with Osteomyelitis. The resident was assessed as cognitively intact, with a BIMS score of 13. The failure to adhere to the facility's CAUTI prevention policy and the absence of a physician's order for the catheter represent significant oversights in the resident's care management.
Deficiency in Respiratory Equipment Management and Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain professional standards of care in the management and storage of respiratory equipment for a resident receiving oxygen therapy. The resident, who was admitted with chronic respiratory failure and hypoxia, was observed using oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula. However, the CPAP machine's nose piece was improperly stored, hanging off the bedside table instead of being kept in a bag. Additionally, the oxygen tubing was not dated, and there were no physician orders for the CPAP or oxygen therapy, indicating a lack of proper documentation and oversight. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of clarity and responsibility regarding the management of the CPAP equipment. A registered nurse was unsure about the storage protocol, and the respiratory therapist admitted there was no documentation of the oxygen tubing being changed on admission or the first Sunday after admission, as required by the facility's policy. The administrator confirmed that the CPAP was brought in by the resident's family and should have been ordered through a DME company if needed. The respiratory therapist also could not find any physician orders or documentation addressing the CPAP, highlighting a significant oversight in the resident's care plan.
Failure to Conduct Entrapment Risk Assessment for Bed Rails
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a comprehensive assessment for entrapment risk was conducted and documented before installing side rails on a resident's bed. The facility did not attempt alternatives to side rail use, nor did they discuss the potential risks and benefits of side rail use with the resident or their representative. Informed consent was not obtained to ensure that side rails were a necessary, safe, and effective intervention. This deficiency was observed in one resident out of five sampled who had side rails in use, potentially affecting all five residents with side rails. Resident #206, who had diagnoses including Cerebrovascular Disease, Hemiplegia, Hemiparesis, and Aphasia, was found with all four side rails up on their hospital bed. The resident was nonverbal and dependent on staff for bed mobility and toileting. Despite the facility's policy requiring an assessment for entrapment risk and informed consent before side rail installation, these steps were not followed. The Director of Nursing confirmed that no risk assessment or consent was obtained, as the use of side rails was considered standard care for all residents, despite the potential risk of entrapment.
Failure in Monthly Drug Regimen Review for PPI Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a licensed pharmacist performed a comprehensive monthly drug regimen review for a resident, specifically regarding the use of a Proton Pump Inhibitor (PPI), Pantoprazole Sodium (Protonix), prescribed for gastrointestinal prophylaxis. The pharmacist interviewed indicated that the computer system used for medication review prompts questions for high-risk medications but does not include specific dosage parameters or PPIs. Additionally, the facility was unable to provide a policy regarding medication regimen review when requested by the surveyors. This deficiency was identified in the case of one resident but had the potential to affect all residents in the facility.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 38 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 1 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Jonesboro
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Springs Jonesboro | 1.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| St Elizabeth's Place | 2.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 1 |
| Ridgecrest Health And Rehabilitation | 4.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Craighead Nursing Center | 8.5 mi | — | 4 | 0 |
| Quail Run Health And Rehab | 14.1 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Arkansas Continued Care Hospital Of Jonesboro.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.