Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: SOUTHERN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES (35 facilities, chain avg rating 3.8★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 12, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$12,335
Fines, last 3 years
4.03
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 15 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. F-0812
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. F-0801
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaintF-0689
View all 15 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
Feb 12, 2026
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Feb 12, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801
Aug 28, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Aug 29, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Aug 29, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
Aug 29, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · from a complaint · F-0758
Oct 20, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805
Oct 20, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (2 → 2).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
9
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2025
All citations:
1
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2026
All citations:
2
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
9
0
F
2024
3
0
E
2025
1
0
D
2026
2
0
F
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Aug 28, 2025
Fine
$12,335
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityArkansas averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
4.03
Arkansas average:
4.71
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.54
Arkansas average:
0.48
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.40
Arkansas average:
4.04
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Arkansas avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
4.03
4.71
3.95
bottom 13% in Arkansas; top 38% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.54
0.48
0.69
top 29% in Arkansas; bottom 43% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.40
4.04
3.50
bottom 13% in Arkansas; top 47% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.34
0.28
0.48
top 29% in Arkansas; bottom 41% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
47.1
49.5
45.8
top 44% in Arkansas; bottom 44% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
25.0
44.8
42.9
top 20% in Arkansas; top 20% in the U.S.
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.74, RN 0.50, weekend 3.16.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.74 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Twin Rivers Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
All 8 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Southern Administrative Services — 35 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.