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

Ms Care Center Of Greenville

1221 East Union Street, Greenville, MS 38703 · For profit - Corporation · 90 certified beds · (662) 335-5811 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (662) 335-5811 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Jun 2024
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

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
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (71%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
1/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1214 Hospital St · (662) 335-9283 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Grocery
595 N Dr Martin Luther King Jr Blvd · (662) 332-1110 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Orlando St · (662) 378-1670 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
226 N 8th St · (662) 537-4990

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 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 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 1 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 increased16.6%20.5%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.8%6.2%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.8%1.4%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection4.9%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 injury1.7%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.2%19.6%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication27.6%23.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.7%97.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.3%6.3%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control34.3%20.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table17.1%21.7%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication3.4%2.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.5%27.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit21.6%15.5%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.252.431.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.192.861.80worse

* 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.

39.2% 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 43 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

39.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
13.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% 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 SNF39.2%CMS range 28.4–52.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF13.1%CMS range 8.5–17.910.7%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 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 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 stay3.3%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 worsened10.0%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 hospitalization7.2%CMS range 4.2–14.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.501.02Oct 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

0.31
RN hours/ resident / day
0.93
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.11
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.35
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.21
RN hoursweekends
70.6%
Total nursing turnover
62.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 90 beds and averages 73.9 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 16 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.31 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.11 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 3.00 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.49 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.35 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 71% is well above 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-02-05)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2023-07-20)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-05 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    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 resident and staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy reviews, the facility failed to honor a resident's rights to make her own healthcare decisions for end-of-life care for one (1) of 24 residents reviewed for advanced directives. Resident #3 Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Advance Directives with a revision date of 9/2022 revealed The resident has the right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.Facility will inform and provide written information to all adult residents concerning the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment at the resident's option and to formulate an Advanced Directive. Record review of the Physician Statement of Status of Mental Capacity of Resident dated 1/23/24 revealed that the physician checked Competent, revealing that the resident was able to make her own decisions. Record review of the DNR (Do Not…

    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 · D2025-02-05 · 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 interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to accurately complete Section A of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for a resident with a serious mental illness (SMI) for one (1) of 21 MDS reviewed. Resident #23 Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Accuracy of Assessments unrevised revealed, The facility must ensure the assessment represents accurately the resident's status during the observation/look back period. The assessment must be reflective of the resident's status at the time of the assessment, by staff qualified to assess relevant care areas and are knowledgeable about the resident's status, needs, strengths, and areas of decline. Record review of the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Summary of Findings Report dated 11/02/16 revealed under, Mental Health: The individual meets criteria for having a diagnosis of mental illness as defined by PASRR. Also revealed under, Axis I primary a diagnosis of Schizophrenia, paranoid type and under, Axis I secondary a diagnosis of Psychotic disorder. Record review of…

    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 · D2024-06-03 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    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 resident and staff interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse when a resident reported that a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) balled up her fist, placed her knuckles into the resident's thigh and twisted for one (1) of eight (8) residents reviewed for abuse. Resident #1. Findings include: Record review of the facility policy, titled Freedom from Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation revealed, It is the policy of the facility to provide services based on the following requirement .Reporting of Alleged Violations .The facility will ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse .are reported immediately, but not later that 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury . to the Administrator of the facility and State Survey Agency, Adult Protective Services and local law enforcement in accordance with state law . A record review of the facility Resident Incident…

    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 · D2023-07-20 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to implement a care plan for shaving for Resident #26, failed to develop a care plan for maintaining a PICC (peripherally inserted central catheter) line for Resident #62, and failed to implement a care plan for fluid restriction for Resident #69. This was for three (3) of 19 care plans reviewed. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Develop/Implement Comprehensive Care Plan with a revision date of September 2022 revealed, The facility will develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident consistent with the resident rights and that includes measurable objectives and timeframe's to meet the resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. The comprehensive care plan must describe the following - 1. The services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable…

    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 · D2023-07-20 · 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, staff interview, resident interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to flush a residents PICC (peripherally inserted central catheter) line for (1) one of (7) seven residents reviewed during medication observations. Resident #62. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Central Venous Catheter Procedures PICC/Central Venous Line Dressing and Caps (needleless connector) Change and Care policy revealed under, Policies and Guidelines . Flush PICC line every 12 hours or as ordered by physician . An observation and interview on 7/19/23 at 10:56 AM, with Resident #62 revealed a PICC line to his left upper arm with a dressing intact. Resident #62 revealed he went to the doctor recently and the device was flushed, but they do not flush it here at the facility. Record review of the July 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #62 revealed an order dated 6/21/23, Normal Saline Flush 1 ML (milliliter) SYR (syringe) flush PICC (peripherally…

    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 · D2023-07-20 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interview, resident interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to shave a resident that was dependent on staff for bathing and personal hygiene for one (1) of 74 residents reviewed during initial tour. Resident #26 Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Mississippi Care Center-ADL (Activities of Daily Living) Care Provided for Dependent Residents with a review date of 09/22 revealed, Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene . An observation on 07/17/23 at 11:39 AM, revealed Resident #26 sitting up in her wheelchair in the day room with a patch of white hair on both sides of her chin that is approximately 1/4 inch wide and approximately 1/4 inch long. An interview and observation on 7/18/23 at 12:45 PM, with Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) #2 revealed that Resident #26 is in an A bed and those baths are performed…

    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 · D2023-07-20 · 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, resident and staff interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to provide appropriate incontinent care treatment to prevent the potential for infection for one (1) of four (4) residents observed for care observations. Resident #21. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Incontinence, revised September 2022, revealed based on the resident's comprehensive assessment, all residents that are incontinent will receive appropriate treatment and services. The Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines revealed: Residents that are incontinent of bladder or bowel will receive appropriate treatment to prevent infections and to restore continence to the extent possible. An interview on 07/17/23 at 11:13 AM, with Resident #21 revealed she doesn't feel like they clean her good. On 7/19/23 at 8:02 AM, an observation of Resident #21's incontinent care with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 revealed that she did not change gloves after setting up the wash…

    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 · D2023-07-20 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    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 observations, resident and staff interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to follow a physician prescribed fluid restriction for (1) one of (4) four residents on dialysis. Resident #69 Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Fluid Restriction policy dated 12/13/2018 revealed, Fluid restriction orders will be carried out as ordered by the physician by the nursing and dietary departments 2. Fluids ordered for the resident will be divided between the Nursing and Dietary departments. 3. Fluids determined to be used by Dietary will be sent out on the meal tray. 4. All fluids given by the aides will be recorded in the resident's room on a fluid intake form. 5. Fluids determined to be used by nursing will be divided between their medication passes. 6. Fluids given by the nurses on medication passes are to be recorded on the eMAR (electronic medication administration record). 7. Fluid intake sheet will be totaled, and a 24-hour total entered on the eTAR (electronic…

    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 · D2023-07-20 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    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, resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to post an oxygen in use sign outside the door and to label oxygen tubing and a humidifier bottle for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed that were receiving oxygen. Resident #21. Findings include: Record review of a procedure Nursing Department Infection Control undated, revealed .Respiratory Equipment: .Oxygen tubing .When not in use, store the mask/cannula in a plastic bag labeled with the resident's name and date . An observation on 07/17/23 at 11:11 AM, revealed, Resident #21's oxygen tubing and humidifier bottle were not labeled and dated. The cannula was laying on the floor underneath the overbed table. No oxygen in use signage was on the door. An observation and interview on 07/19/23 at 8:16 AM, with the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed, Resident #21's oxygen tubing was laying on the floor and the oxygen tubing and humidifier water bottle was not labeled. The DON stated that 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-20 · 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 observations, staff interviews, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to prevent the possibility of infection as evidenced by failing to perform hand hygiene, provide a clean workspace, change gloves and keep oxygen tubing off the floor and in a plastic bag for one (1) of four (4) resident care observations. Resident #21 Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Infection Control, revised September 2022, revealed: Staff involved in direct resident contact will perform hand hygiene (even if gloves are used). Hand hygiene is performed: After removing personal protective equipment (e.g., gloves, gown, facemask). Gloves changed and hand hygiene performed before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care. Oxygen tubing, when not in use, store the mask/cannula in a plastic bag labeled with the resident's name and date. An observation, on 07/17/23 at 11:11 AM, revealed Resident #21's oxygen tubing and humidifier bottle were not labeled…

    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
  • Potential for harm · E2021-03-04 · 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, staff interview, facility policy review the facility failed to label and date left over food in the refrigerator for one (1) of two (2) tours. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled, Food Storage Labeling, revised 10/17, revealed that the facility will ensure the safety and quality of food by following good storage and labeling procedures. The procedure revealed suggested labeling include the common name and the date of preparation or the use by date. An observation of the standalone refrigerator on 3/2/21, at 11:30 AM, revealed metal containers of fortified sweet potatoes, vegetable soup, and chicken soup not labeled or dated. An interview, on 3/2/21 at 11:45 AM with the Dietary Manager (DM), confirmed the containers should be labeled and dated in order to know how long they had been in the refrigerator, so they could be discarded. The DM revealed she did not know what staff member placed the containers in the refrigerator unlabeled. The DM stated that bad food could cause sickness. An interview, on 03/04/21 at 12:45 PM, with the DM revealed…

    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 · Ecited before2021-03-04 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, facility policy review and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff wore masks appropriately covering the nose and mouth to prevent the possible spread of the COVID-19 virus for three (3) of five (5) survey days. Findings Include: The facility policy titled, Personal Protective Equipment, dated 4/1/20, revealed this facility promotes appropriate use of personal protective equipment to prevent the transmission of pathogens to residents, visitors, and other staff. An observation of the dietary department on 3/2/21, at 11:00 AM, revealed the Dietary Manager (DM) wearing her mask below her nose. Dietary staff #1 and #3 had their masks below their nose while preparing food and setting up trays for the lunch meal. An observation, on 3/3/21, at 1:45 PM, revealed Dietary Staff #2 in the dietary department with his face mask below his nose. An interview, on 3/3/21, at 2:30 PM, with the Dietary Manager (DM), revealed that she and all workers should have their masks over their mouth and nose. On 3/4/21, at 2:14 PM, an interview with Dietary…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2021-03-04 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolated
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, facility policy review, the facility failed to prevent the potential of injury to a resident, as evidenced by the absence of a wheelchair arm rest exposing a protruding screw for one (1) of 18 residents reviewed. Resident #1 Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled Equipment undated, revealed wheelchairs, walkers, crutches, and canes will be provided to the residents and are maintained as the property of the facility. An observation on 03/01/21, at 02:53 PM, revealed the left arm rest missing on Resident #1's wheelchair. Further observation revealed a screw that was sticking upward approximately 1/2 inch out of the metal piece where armrest should be. An interview on 03/01/21, at 02:54 PM, with Resident #1, confirmed that he does get up in the wheelchair at times. An observation on 03/03/21, at 11:14 AM, revealed Resident #1 up in his wheelchair with no arm rest on the left side. The screw was sticking upwards from metal bar. Resident #1 had on a long sleeve shirt. An observation and interview on 03/03/21, at 11:25 AM, with…

    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

“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 MISSISSIPPI CARE CENTER — 5 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 4 of 53.4+0.6 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.2+1.8 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 54.0-2.0 vs chain
Quality measures 1 of 52.6-1.6 vs chain
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
DELANEY, STEVENIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR50%since 10/27/2004
PACE, GARRYIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNF50%since 10/27/2004
BEEBE, HAROLDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2004
SHELTON, REBECCAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/05/2014
BUFORD, SAMANTHAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
HERZOG, JOHNIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$8.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-8.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$568K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 89%Medicare 9%Other / private 2%

About 89% 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 $568K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. 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

$341per resident / day
operating cost
$10,377per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$316per 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 255252. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-02-05, 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