No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Wilkinson County Senior Care

116 South Lafayette Street, Centreville, MS 39631 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 60 certified beds · (601) 645-5253 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (601) 645-5253 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 12 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (35% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • about 21% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
102 W Freedom Dr · (601) 565-0046 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
149 W Main St · (601) 645-5411 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
207 E Main St · (601) 645-6105 · Call to confirm hours
Park
147 W Main St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased10.5%20.5%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight13.2%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.1%1.4%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection3.5%2.5%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%1.6%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.8%3.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened1.4%19.6%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication23.9%23.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.4%97.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.0%6.3%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.8%20.7%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.1%21.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication9.1%2.5%1.4%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days3.452.431.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.212.861.80worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

0.39U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.321.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.38
RN hours/ resident / day
1.68
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.39
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.45
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.25
RN hoursweekends
34.7%
Total nursing turnover
60.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 53.7 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.45 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.38 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.39 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.79 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.71 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.43 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-28)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-03-28)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to properly store frozen and dry storage food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one (1) of four (4) days of survey.Findings Include: A record review of the facility policy Storage of Frozen Foods with a review date of 11/23 revealed, The facility ensures the quality and safety of frozen food through accepted storage practices. 8. Opened boxes with liners should be closed and sealed tightly with packing tape or twist ties .On 08/25/2025 at 10:48 AM, during an initial tour of the kitchen with the Dietary Manager (DM), multiple concerns were identified in the freezer and dry storage areas. In the freezer, several food items were observed open and exposed to air inside their original cardboard boxes, including [NAME] biscuits, sugar-free chocolate chip cookies, Salisbury steak patties, chicken patties, and fish sticks. In the dry storage room, a box of yellow cake mix was found stored in a…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-06 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with respect and dignity for three (3) of 27 residents on A Wing. (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3). Findings Included: A review of the facility's resident document, undated, revealed .As a resident in a long-term care facility, you have many rights guaranteed by law . Your rights include: A dignified and comfortable living environment . Dignity and Respect You have the right to dignity and respect in the care you receive and the setting you live in. Resident #1 A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #1 on 4/11/25 with diagnoses including Atrial Fibrillation. A record review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/22/25 for Resident #1 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6, indicating severe cognitive impairment. A record review of the facility's investigation revealed that on 5/12/25, Resident #1 reported to the Social Services Director that a night shift…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-28 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff and Resident Representative (RR) interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan was implemented for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) for one (1) of 16 sampled residents. (Resident #30) Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plan-Comprehensive, dated 10/2016 revealed, Policy Statement: .An individualized (person centered) comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychological needs is developed for each resident . 1. Our facility's Care Planning/Interdisciplinary Team, in coordination with the resident, his/her family or resident representative, develops and maintains a comprehensive care plan for each resident that identifies the highest level of functioning the resident may be expected to attain . 3. Each resident's comprehensive care plan is designed to . d. Reflect the resident's expressed wishes regarding care and treatment goals . A record review of the comprehensive Care Plan…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that tray line food temperatures were checked and documented prior to serving each meal for 15 days of 24 days of recorded temperatures reviewed for the month of March 2024. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Monitoring Temperature of Cooked Foods, with a revision date of 10/17, revealed . POLICY: The temperature of TCS (Time/Temperature Control) cooked foods will be monitored to ensure that the foods are not in the danger zone (above 41degrees F {Fahrenheit} and below135 degrees F) for more than 6 hours PROCEDURE: 2 . b. When food is placed in the hot holding equipment. The temperature of the food should be 135 degrees F or higher . On 03/25/24 at 9:40 AM, an initial tour of the kitchen with the Dietary Manager (DM) revealed several of the pages in the tray line temperature log binder, were incomplete or blank. The DM stated she expects staff to check tray line food temperatures and document the temperatures in the binder. She stated she recently did an…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff and Resident Representative (RR) interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a dependent resident received Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care, as evidenced by long thick toenails for one (1) of 16 sampled residents. (Resident #30) Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titles, ADL Care Policy, dated 8/23 revealed, POLICY It is the policy of this facility to provide appropriate treatment and services in relation to ADL care to residents to ensure all ADL needs are met on a daily basis, while attaining or maintaining the residence of highest, practicable, physical, mental, and social well-being . 2. The resident, to the extent possible, and /or the family/resident representative will be included in setting goals of care related to ADL's . On 3/25/24 at 10:46 AM, during an interview with the RR for Resident #30, she revealed she has concerned about the resident's toenails. She said the facility has failed to keep them cut. On 3/25/24 at 11:02 AM, in an observation and interview of Resident #30's toenails…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0700 — isolated
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to inform a resident or Resident Representative (RR) of the risks and benefits of the use of bed rails prior to bed rail installation for one (1) of 16 sampled residents. (Resident #14) Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Physical Restraints, dated 2/20/2012, revealed, .Restraints shall only be used for the safety and well-being of the residents .1. Restraints will only be used with . the informed consent from the resident, physician and/or responsible party . 5. Practices that are not permitted include: a. Using bedrails to keep a resident from voluntarily getting out of bed as opposed to enhancing mobility while in bed On 3/25/24 at 10:30 AM, an observation revealed ¼ bedrails on the bed of Resident #14. The resident was not in bed and the bedrails were down. On 03/27/24 at 10:30 AM, during an interview and record review of the medical record with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 confirmed Resident #14 did…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0849 — isolated
    Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the facility's designated Hospice Coordinator coordinated the care provided by the Hospice service and the facility for one (1) of two (2) Hospice residents reviewed. (Resident #27) Findings include: A review of facility's policy titled, Hospice Program, dated 7/13/17, revealed, It is the policy of the facility to contract hospice services for residents who wish to participate in such programs .Procedure: 8. As the facility designee, the Director of Nursing, is responsible for working with hospice representatives to coordinate care to the resident provided by the facility staff and hospice staff. The Director of Nursing is responsible for the following: a. Collaborating with hospice and coordinating the facility staff participation in the hospice care planning process. b. Communicating with hospice staff participating in the care for the terminal illness, related conditions, and other conditions, to ensure quality of care for the resident and family . On 03/25/24 at 1:26 PM, in…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-02-24 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to accurately complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for one (1) of 20 MDS assessments reviewed. Resident #23. Findings Include: Review of the facility's policy, MDS Assessment, dated 5/2006, revealed It is the policy of this facility to follow the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) process as set forth by CMS (Centers for Medicare/Medicaid) protocol. Record review of Resident #23's admission Record revealed the facility admitted her on 1/1/21 with diagnoses including Schizophrenia, Major Depressive Disorder, and Bipolar Disorder. Record review of the Pre-admission Screening (PAS) Application for Long Term Care dated 1/1/21 for Resident #23, revealed the question of Person has a diagnosis of a major mental illness? was answered with Yes which confirmed Resident #23 had a major mental illness upon admission. Record review of the facility's Order Summary Report for Resident #23 with active physician orders as of 2/11/22 revealed current physician orders for Divalproex Sodium…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-02-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to develop and implement the care plan related to catheter care, wound care, pain, and behaviors for three (3) of 20 care plans reviewed. Resident #9, Resident #54, and Resident #63. Findings include: Record review of the facility's policy, Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 10/2016, revealed .Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. Our facility's Care Planning/Interdisciplinary Team, in coordination with the resident, his/her family or resident representative, develop and maintains a comprehensive care plan for each resident .9. The Care Planning/Interdisciplinary Team is responsible for the review and updating of care plans: Resident #9 Record review of the facility's, Comprehensive Care Plan, revealed Resident #9 had a Foley catheter related to Neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder which included an intervention to assure that a catheter strap is secured per protocol to prevent the tubing and leg bags from catching or pulling with the resident's regular movement. During an…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-02-24 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to clean a pressure wound in a manner to prevent the possible spread of infection for one (1) of four (4) pressure wound care observations. Resident #54 Findings Include: Record review of the facility's policy, Clean Dressing Change, undated, revealed It is the policy of the facility to provide wound care in a manner to decrease potential for infection and/or cross contamination .12. Cleanse the wound as ordered, taking care to not contaminate other skin surfaces or other surfaces of the wound (i.e clean outward from the center of the wound) . On 2/9/22 at 10:20 AM, the State Agency (SA) observed wound care to Resident # 54's right heel by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 and assisted by Registered Nurse (RN) #3. During the observation, LPN #2 cleaned the wound with gauze and wiped in a circular motion from the center of the wound outward two times, using the same gauze. LPN #2 then disposed of the gauze and obtained clean gauze and repeated the same cleaning motion, wiping in a…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-02-24 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to anchor catheter tubing during catheter care to minimize movement or prevent possible friction or trauma and failed to ensure a catheter leg strap was in place for one (1) of three (3) catheter care observations. Resident #9. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy, Catheter Care Policy, dated 8/20 revealed It is the policy of this facility to ensure that residents with indwelling catheters receive appropriate catheter care .Compliance Guidelines: . 12. wipe the catheter making sure to hold and secure the catheter in place to not pull on the catheter . Resident #9 Observation on 02/08/22 at 01:22 PM, of catheter care with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) # 2 revealed CNA #2 failed to secure the tubing on the catheter while providing catheter care. CNA #2 held the sides of the penis and pulled the tubing outward and did not hold the tubing secure. Resident #2 jumped when CNA #2 pulled on the tubing. Resident…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-02-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, record reviews and facility policy review the facility failed to prevent the possible spread of infection for one (1) of three (3) catheter care observations. Resident #59. Findings Include: Record review of the facilities Infection Prevention and Control Program dated 8/2017 revealed, It is a policy of this facility to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections .4. Hand Hygiene Protocol a. All staff shall wash their hands when coming on duty, between resident contacts, after handling contaminated objects, after PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) removal, before and after eating, before and after toileting, and before going off duty. b. Staff shall wash their hands before and after performing resident care procedures. c. Hands shall be washed in accordance with our facilities established hand…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to TREND CONSULTANTS — 15 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.5+1.5 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.5+1.5 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 54.1≈ chain avg
Quality measures 3 of 52.0+1.0 vs chain
The other 14 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.5★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
KELLY, CHARLESIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2002
KELLY, RITAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2007
WARNOCK, LORIIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/27/2021
WILKINSON COUNTY SENIOR CARE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2007

CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$5.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-7.9%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.3M
Related-party expense21% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 92%Medicare 5%Other / private 2%

About 92% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$298per resident / day
operating cost
$9,073per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$277per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MS

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Mississippi Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Mississippi
$9,581/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$9,885/mo
Nursing home (private)
$4,369/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 255126. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-28, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next