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

Briar Hill Rest Home

1201 Gunter Road, Florence, MS 39073 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 60 certified beds · (601) 939-6371 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (601) 939-6371 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citations on record (F0600, F0602) — most recent Apr 20251 actual-harm citation$8,788 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Apr 2025
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • the CMS record shows $8,788 in federal fines (most recent 2025-04-09)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
  • 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.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
3091 Highway 49 S Ste B · (601) 891-8134 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
2195 Highway 49 S · (601) 891-7007 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
IGA2.0 mi
132 S Church St · (601) 845-8447 · Call to confirm hours
Park
160 Brandon Ave · (601) 420-3400 · 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 1 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 1 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 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 increased22.8%20.5%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.4%6.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder3.4%1.4%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.6%2.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms5.7%1.6%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.3%3.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.4%19.6%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication19.3%23.8%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%97.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers9.1%6.3%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control32.0%20.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table29.7%21.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%2.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine80.6%84.6%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission36.6%27.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit19.8%15.5%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days5.332.431.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.762.861.80worse

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ 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.

49.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 45 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

49.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
44.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.39U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.14hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.16hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 44.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 27 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

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 12% 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 SNF49.7%CMS range 37.6–65.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.9%CMS range 7.5–17.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge44.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge33.3%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge33.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 stay1.5%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization8.2%CMS range 4.3–15.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.381.02Oct 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

0.74
RN hours/ resident / day
1.34
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.24
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.32
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.38
RN hoursweekends
52.9%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 54.2 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 4.32 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.74 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.24 is below 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 3.65 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.59 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.89 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-22)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-15)

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.

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

  • Actual harm · G2025-04-09 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    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 the resident's right to be free from neglect when staff failed to both assist during use of a full body lift to transfer a resident from bed to the geriatric chair, which resulted in the resident being transferred to the hospital with injuries for one (1) of (30) residents who are assessed to use a full body lift. Resident #1 Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Modified Lifting Policy, updated 2/3/23, reveals, Facility will provide a safe work environment for patient care areas by providing and requiring the use of safety materials, equipment and training designed to prevent personnel and patient injury .Procedure.1. Staff will follow the documented lifting protocol deemed appropriate for each resident. A review of the facility policy titled Total Lift Vanderlift II, updated 2/3/23, revealed, .Responsibility: Two people are required to operate the Total Lift. On 4/9/25 at 10:04 AM, the State Agency (SA) conducted a phone interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1. During…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-05-28 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — pattern
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, facility policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with reasonable accommodations to maintain a safe and functional environment by failing to keep call lights within physical reach for seven (7) of ten (10) sampled residents. Residents #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, and #10.Findings Included:Record review of the facility policy Call Light Policy, revised January 12, 2015, revealed, .1. All facility personnel must be aware of call lights at all times.11. Be sure all call lights are placed conveniently for the resident.On 5/28/26 at 4:01 PM, observation revealed Resident #7 and Resident #10 did not have their call lights within their reach.On 5/28/26 at 4:05 PM, observation and interviews revealed that Resident #5 and Resident #8's call lights were out of reach and stuck (could not be pulled out easily) under Resident #5's bed. Observation revealed that Resident #5 had to get off her bed and it took Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 two minutes and moved the bed several times for LPN #1 to retrieve the call lights from under…

    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 · D2026-05-28 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolated
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, and sanitary environment for residents as evidenced by failing to maintain sharps containers in a safe manner for two (2) of four (4) observed sharps containers.Findings Included:Record review of the facility policy Sharps Container Policy, undated, revealed The facility will utilize sharp container as follows: For disposal of all sharp items, (not all inclusive) .Lancets.Sealed with tape and dated when disposed of. The facility policy did not address when or how often the sharps containers should be emptied. On 5/28/26 at 3:40 PM, during an observation and interview the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed the sharps container in the shower room on the locked dementia unit was full to the point of being unable to be opened and there were three uncapped used aqua-blue disposable razors on the top of the container. The DON confirmed that the sharps container should have been properly disposed of and replaced with a new one and that the razors on top of the container could…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-22 · tag F0575 — isolated
    Post a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
    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, interview, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide information for pertinent state agencies and advocacy groups, specifically the ombudsman for two (2) of three (3) days of survey. Findings include: Record review of facility grievance policy Resident and Family Grievances reviewed 2/24/19 revealed, .Information on how to file a grievance or complaint will be available to the resident. Information may include but is not limited to. 7.a. The contact information of the grievance official with whom a grievance can be filed, including his or her name. business address (mailing and email) and business phone number. b. The contact information of independent entities with whom grievances may be filed, that is, the pertinent State Survey Agency and Local Long-Term Care Ombudsman program or protection and advocacy system. c. The time frame that a resident may reasonably expect completion of the review of the grievance and a written decision regarding his or her…

    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 · D2026-01-22 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    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, interview, and record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure that services were provided in accordance with professional standards of practice and within staff scope of practice for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for enteral nutrition services. (Resident #6) Findings Include:Record review of the facility policy Tube Feeding undated revealed, .Responsibility: All licensed Nursing personnel monitored by the Charge Nurse .On 1/21/26 at 2:30 PM, an observation of Certified Nursing Assistant #2 (CNA) doing incontinent check on Resident #6 revealed she placed feeding pump on hold prior to checking the resident. CNA #2 left the room to obtain supplies for incontinent care.On 1/21/26 at 2:35 PM, during an interview with CNA #2 revealed they let us place the pump on hold when do incontinent check on resident before we let the bed down flat. She stated when they finished, they were told to turn the pump back on. She stated she watched the nurses operate pump and know…

    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 · D2026-01-22 · 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, interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received necessary grooming assistance in accordance with her preferences for one (1) of (15) residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Resident #41Findings include:A review of the facility policy, Resident Rights, undated, revealed .5. Respect and dignity. The resident has the right to be treated with respect and dignity During an interview with Resident #41 on 1/20/26 at 11:20 AM, she stated that the staff do not shave under her arms. She reported that when she lived at home, she shaved under her arms every day or as often as needed. She added that if staff shaved under her arms at least once a week, she would be satisfied.During an observation on 1/20/26 at 11:21 AM, revealed Resident #41's underarm hair to be thick and approximately two and one-half (2.5) inches long.During an interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 at 10:20 AM on 1/21/26, the CNA stated that shaving under the arms is part of the ADLs for residents. She explained that it…

    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 · E2024-08-15 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to store food and maintain sanitary practices in accordance with professional standards for food safety related to unlabeled foods, foods without identified dates, exposed foods, and overly ripe produce for one (1) of two (2) kitchen observations. Findings Include: A review of the facility's policy, Storage of Refrigerated Food, revised 10/17, revealed, The facility ensures the quality and safety and sanitation of refrigerated foods through accepted storage practices. Procedure .4. No food is left uncovered. 5. All opened foods are labeled with common name of food, date stored, and use-by date . On 08/13/24 at 9:19 AM, during an observation of the kitchen and interview with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), Refrigerator #1 had nine (9) overly ripe tomatoes containing white biological growth on each tomato. There was (1) unopened bag of salad mix with a facility received sticker of 8/7/24, with no manufacturer's date, and a brown…

    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 · D2024-08-15 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
    Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
    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 ensure a resident was free from exploitation for one (1) of 16 sampled residents. Resident #12. Findings Include: A review of the facility's policy, Resident Rights, dated 2018, revealed: 1. Resident Rights. The resident has the right to a dignified existence, self-determination .5. Respect and Dignity. The resident has a right to be treated with respect and dignity . A review of the facility's policy, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, reviewed/revised 5/25/24, revealed: Policy: It is the policy of this facility to provide protection for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property . Definitions: Exploitation means taking advantage of a resident for personal gain .Mistreatment means inappropriate treatment or exploitation of a resident . IV.…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-15 · 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 interviews, record reviews, and facility policy reviews, the facility failed to implement/follow the care plan for three (3) of sixteen (16) sampled residents. Resident #12, Resident #13, Resident #48 Findings Include: A review of the facility policy titled Care Plans, updated 2/3/23 revealed, Policy: Each resident will have a person-centered plan of care to identify problems, needs and strengths that will identify how the interdisciplinary team will provide care .Resident Care Summary-part of the Comprehensive Care Plan is used as the tool to make staff aware of the resident's daily care needs . Resident #12 A record review of the ADL (Activities of Daily Living) comprehensive Care Plan dated 1/29/24, revealed an intervention related to transfers as Transfers: Extensive Two Person Assist At 1:05 PM on August 13, 2024, as Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #2 recapped what she saw in the social media video, she specifically pointed out that she saw CNA #1 grab the resident under the arm and move her to the geriatric chair without assistance. She stated the transfer was…

    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 · D2024-08-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    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, interview, record review, and policy review the facility failed to ensure a two-person transfer, as evidenced by video evidence of a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) transferring a resident from the bed to the geriatric chair by herself. The resident required a 2-person transfer. This was for one (1) of 16 sampled residents. Resident # 12. Findings Include: A review of the facility policy titled Modified Lifting Policy, no date, reveals, .Facility will provide a safe work environment for patient care areas by providing and requiring the use of safety materials, equipment and training designed to prevent personnel and patient injury .It is crucial that health care professionals practice safe lifting, transporting . At 1:05 PM on 8/13/24, as Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) #2 recapped what she saw in the social media video, she specifically pointed out that she saw CNA #1 put the geriatric chair in front of the resident's bed. She remembers seeing CNA #1 grab the resident under the arms and…

    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 · D2024-08-15 · tag F0732 — isolated
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to post the direct care daily staffing numbers in a location accessible to residents and visitors for two (2) of three (3) days of survey. Findings Include: Review of the facility ' s policy, Nurse Staffing Posting Information, revised 2/3/2023, revealed, .It is the policy of this facility to make staffing information readily available in a readable format to residents and visitors at any given time. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The nurse staffing information will be posted on a daily basis .2. The facility will post the nursing staffing data at the beginning of each shift . On 8/13/24 at 9:30 AM, there were no direct care daily staffing numbers posted in the facility. On 8/14/24 at 8:30 AM, there were no direct care daily staffing numbers posted in the facility. On 8/15/24 at 10:15 AM, in an interview with the Director of Nursing, she stated she was aware the nursing staffing had to posted in a prominent place that was readily accessible to residents and visitors at the…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-15 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    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 their medication error rate was less than five percent as evidenced by three (3) errors were observed out of twenty-six (26) medication administration opportunities. This affected two (2) of seven (7) residents observed during medication pass, resulting in a medication error rate of 11.54%. (Residents #48 and #13) Findings include: A review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration General Guidelines, (undated) revealed, Medications are to be administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and practices .Procedure .2. Medications are to be administered in accordance with the written orders of attending physicians, taking into consideration manufacturer's specifications, and professional standards of practice . A review of the facility's policy titled, Ordering and Receiving Medications from Pharmacy, (undated) revealed, Medications are ordered and received from the pharmacy in a timely manner .Procedure . 2. A. Re-order medication 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-15 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to serve therapeutic portion sizes of foods as planned per the facility's menu for one (1) of seven (7) food items requiring specific portions on the lunch meal tray line. Resident #40 Findings Include: A review of the facility's policy, Tray Assembly, revised 6/17, revealed, .Prepared foods are portioned and assembled for individual meals in the food and nutrition services department. Procedure .6. Menu items and equipment are positioned in reach of the food service employees. These items include .c. Serving utensils as specified on the menu and equipment needed for correct portions .10. Portions are .weighed on portion scales . A record review of the facility's Menu Guide Report for Spring/Summer 2024 revealed the following portion sizes to be served at lunch: 3 ounces of country meatloaf, 1/3 cup of mashed potatoes,1-ounce brown gravy, 1/3 cup of buttered green peas, one (1) fresh baked roll, one (1) piece of confetti cake with icing, and one (1) cup of iced tea. On 08/13/24 at 10:51…

    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 · D2023-01-19 · 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

    Based on observation, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review,the facility failed to provide incontinent care in a manner to prevent possible urinary tract infections for one (1) of five (5) observations of incontinent care. Resident #49. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Incontinent Care, undated, revealed, To provide routine, preventative skin, perineal care to residents after an incontinent episode .When washing perineal area, wash the perineal area from front to back. For the male resident retract the foreskin while using clean area of the washcloth or adult wipes for each stroke . During an observation of incontinent care on 1/17/23, at 11:33 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 failed to use a clean area of the adult wipe while cleaning the penis of Resident #49. CNA #1 cleansed the resident's scrotum with an adult wipe by wiping several times with the same wipe, then used the same wipe and same area of the wipe to cleanse the head of Resident #49's penis. During an interview on 1/19/23, at 11:00 AM, CNA #1 confirmed while providing perineal care…

    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
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

$8,788 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,788 — penalty dated 2025-04-09

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to BRIAR HILL MANAGEMENT — 6 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 2 of 53.2-1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 54.5-0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 1 of 51.8-0.8 vs chain
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, 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
PHILIPPE, LYNNIndividualDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/17/2002
ROTOLO, DAVIDIndividualDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/17/2002
ROTOLO, ROBERTIndividualDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/17/2002
BRIAR HILL MANAGEMENT, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
BURLISON, SANDYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/25/2019
BURNS, SHARONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/28/2008
DAVIS, TRACYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/22/2024
FREEMAN, JAMESIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/05/2026
GREEN, DONNAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/04/2010
KING, CURTISIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2016
MUHA, ASHLEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/04/2010
WHITE, DEBORAHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/12/2014
WHITLOW, CARRIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/05/2022
B.H.R.H. HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/11/2003
OMNICARE LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2017
ESTES, TIMOTHYIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 11/11/2008
RUBERTINO, FROSINIIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 09/18/2017

CMS files one row per role, so the 32 rows in the source record cover these 17 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.

3 organizational owners 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.

$6.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-4.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.3M
Related-party expense21% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 76%Medicare 11%Other / private 14%

About 76% 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.

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

$332per resident / day
operating cost
$10,084per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$318per 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 255303. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-22, 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