Driftwood Nursing Center
1500 Broad Avenue, Gulfport, MS 39501 · Non profit - Other · 151 certified beds · (228) 822-6900 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Aug 2024
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (100%) 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
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 | 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 held steady at 3 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 23.9% | 20.5% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.1% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.6% | 1.4% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.3% | 2.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 1.6% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 39.7% | 19.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.7% | 23.8% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 97.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 8.3% | 6.3% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 18.8% | 20.7% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 27.1% | 21.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.4% | 2.5% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.0% | 84.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 30.9% | 27.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 21.9% | 15.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.69 | 2.43 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.92 | 2.86 | 1.80 | worse |
* 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.
37.4% 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 59 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 35.5% 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 31 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 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 28% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 37.4%CMS range 26.8–51.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 13.1%CMS range 8.9–17.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 35.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 22.6% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 35.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 96.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | not 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 stay | 6.6% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 8.2% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.6%CMS range 5.1–13.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.14 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 151 beds and averages 99.2 residents a day — about 66% occupied, or roughly 52 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 4.40 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.35 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 3.67 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.69 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.75 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 100% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
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.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-29 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to transmit resident assessments to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) within (14) days of completion for two (2) of (2) sampled residents (Residents #23 and #95), with the potential to affect all (14) residents who triggered for a late Resident Assessment.Findings include:A review of the facility's MDS (Minimum Data Set ) Policy, revised 1/10/24, revealed, .Standard.I. The CMS Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual is the primary source of information for completion of an MDS assessment. II. Timing, scheduling, and completion of MDS assessments and entry and discharge reporting will be carried out per the guidelines set forth in the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual version 3.0. IX Transmission of MDS.Comprehensive assessments must be transmitted electronically within fourteen (14) days of the care plan completion date. All other MDS assessments must be submitted within (14) days of the MDS completion date.Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-29 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide the specific reason and basis for a hospital transfer in plain language for one (1) of two (2) residents sampled for hospitalization. Resident #54.Findings include:A review of the facility's policy, Transfer and Discharge (including AMA) (Against Medical Advice ) date implemented 02/05/2025, revealed, .Definitions: . 'Transfer and Discharge' includes movement of a resident to a bed outside of the certified facility whether that bed is in the same physical place or not. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: . 3. The facility's transfer/discharge notice will be provided to the resident and resident's representative in a language and manner in which they can understand. The notice will include all the following at the time it is provided: a. The specific reason and basis for transfer or discharge.A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #54 on 12/3/25 with diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. A record review of the Progress Notes 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain infection prevention and control practices by allowing a resident meal tray to be stored in a biohazard room for one (1) of two (2) observations. Findings include:A record review of the facility's policy, Infection Prevention and Control Policy Program, dated 2/1/25, revealed, This facility has established and maintains an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary.environment.On 01/28/2026 at 9:21 AM, during an observation with Housekeeper/Maintenance #1, there was a biohazard room on the north wing near the nurse's station. The room was marked with a biohazard logo and secured with keypad entry. Inside the room, there was a resident food tray that was placed beneath posted signage indicating food and utensils were not to be placed in the room. The tray contained a meal preference ticket identifying Resident #35 and indicated a dinner meal dated 1/27/2026. Housekeeping/Maintenance Staff #1 confirmed the tray should not have been in the biohazard room 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.
- Potential for harm · F2024-10-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure food temperatures were tested under sanitary conditions for one (1) of four (4) kitchen observations. Findings Include: During an observation of food temperature readings for the lunch meal on 10/30/24 at 11:45 AM in the kitchen area, the cook was observed using a thermometer to check the temperature of the macaroni and cheese. After testing the temperature, the cook wiped the thermometer on a clean towel. The same thermometer was then used to test the baked chicken, green peas, pureed chicken, and mashed potatoes, with the cook wiping the thermometer on the same towel after each test without sanitizing it. During an interview on 10/31/24 at 09:00 AM, the cook stated she had been cooking at the facility for six (6) months and had been cleaning the thermometer with a clean, dry towel during that time. She was uncertain if she had been specifically trained on sanitizing the thermometer, mentioning that numerous in-services were conducted, but she could not recall specific sanitation training. The cook further…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-31 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide 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, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure an indwelling urinary catheter was clinically indicated for one (1) of four (4) residents observed with catheters. (Resident #87) Findings Include: A review of the facility's Appropriate Use of Indwelling Catheters Policy, dated 03/01/17, revealed: .An indwelling urinary catheter will be utilized only when a resident's clinical condition demonstrates that catheterization is necessary. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines .4. The use of an indwelling urinary catheter will be in accordance with physician orders, which will include the diagnosis or clinical condition making the use of the catheter necessary .6. Documentation to support decision-making will be included in the medical record, including but not limited to: a. Clinical or medical conditions demonstrating the need for an indwelling catheter. b. Assessment of incontinence .d. Services provided to restore normal bladder function to the extent possible .7. Indwelling urinary catheters will be used on a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to use enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) by not wearing the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) during catheter care for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for catheter care. (Resident #87) Findings Include: A review of the facility's policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, dated 05/01/24, revealed, .It is the policy of this facility to implement enhanced barrier precautions for the prevention of transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms. Definitions: 'Enhanced Barrier Precautions' (EBP) refer to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gown and glove use during high-contact resident care activities . Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines .2. Initiation of Enhanced Barrier Precautions .b. an order for enhanced barrier precautions will be obtained for residents with any of the following .i .indwelling medical devices (e.g .urinary catheters . During an observation on 10/28/24…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-20 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect 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
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's right to be free from misappropriation when facility staff used a resident's credit card to purchase goods or services without the consent or authorization of the resident for one (1) of five (5) sampled residents, Resident #1. Based on the facility's implementation of corrective actions, the State Agency (SA) determined the deficiency to be Past Non-Compliance (PNC) as of 6/29/24, prior to the SA's entrance on 8/19/24. Findings Include: A review of the facility's policy, Abuse Neglect and Exploitation, dated 10/01/22, revealed that .It is the policy of this facility to provide protections for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent .exploitation of resident property .Definitions .Misappropriation of Resident Property means the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful temporary or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the resident's consent .Prevention…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on staff interviews, record review, and the facility policy review, the facility failed to develop appropriate interventions for a cognitively impaired resident after a fall to prevent reoccurrence for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents. Resident #1 Findings include: A record review of the facility's policy Fall Risk Assessment with revised date 01/05/24 revealed . It is the policy of this facility to provide an environment that is free from accidents and hazards .Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: . 4. The At Risk for Falls care plan will include interventions, including adequate supervision, consistent with a resident's needs, goals, and current standards of practice in order to reduce the risk of an accident . A record review of the Witnessed Fall Report dated 05/15/24 revealed Resident #1 had a fall in the hallway. When the staff asked Resident #1 what had happened, he indicated that he did not know. A record review of the Witnessed Fall Report dated 05/23/24 revealed Resident #1 had a fall in his room. The resident's roommate stated that the resident 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-02 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to transmit Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments by their target date, for 19 of 24 residents reviewed for MDS assessments. Resident #1, #2, #4, #17, #25, #32, #36, #37, #62, #65, #69, #72, #74, #78, #79, #83, #86, #93, and #104. Findings include: Review of the Memorial Driftwood Nursing Center MDS Policy with a revision date of 06/30/2019 revealed, Standard: .IX. Transmission of MDS .All MDS will be transmitted .i. Comprehensive assessments must be transmitted electronically within 14 days of the Care Plan completion date .ii. All other MDS assessments must be submitted within 14 days of the MDS completion date . Record review of MDS Assessments on 2/27/23, revealed the following: 1. The quarterly assessment for Resident #1 with a target date of 1/23/23, and the discharge MDS with a target date of 1/24/23, had not been transmitted. 2. The quarterly assessment for Resident # 2, with a target date of 1/20/23, had not been transmitted. 3. The quarterly assessment for Resident #4, with a target…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-02 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident had ready and reasonable access to personal funds for one (1) of 24 sampled residents, Resident #68 Findings include: A review of the facility's policy, (Proper Name of Facility) - Resident Personal Funds, implemented on 2/1/22, revealed the policy did not contain information regarding ready and reasonable access to personal funds for residents. On 02/27/23 at 11:39 AM, in an interview with Resident #68, he stated that he cannot get money from his personal funds on the weekend because the office staff is not at the facility on weekends. On 03/02/23 at 10:42 AM, in an interview with the Administrative Assistant (AA), she stated she is responsible for the residents' personal trust fund accounts. She said that the Activities Director (AD) also has access to $85 and will issue personal funds to the residents. The AA stated that she works Monday through Friday, from 8:00 AM until 4:30 PM and the AD works on the weekends at times. On 03/02/23 at 10:50 AM, in an interview with the AD,…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-02 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff and resident interviews, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to complete a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level II for one (1) of three (3) PASRRs reviewed. Resident #6 Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, (Proper Name of Facility)-Resident Assessment in Coordination with PASRR Program with a revision date of 02/01/2019 revealed, .Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. All applicants to this facility will be screened for serious mental disorders or intellectual disabilities and related conditions in accordance with the State's Medicaid rules for screening .a. ii. Positive Level I Screen-necessitates a PASRR Level II evaluation prior to admission. b. PASRR Level II-a comprehensive evaluation by the appropriate state-designated authority (cannot be completed by the facility) that determines whether the individual has MD (Mental Disorder) , ID (Intellectual Disorder) or related condition, determines the appropriate setting for the individual, and recommends any specialized services and/or…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CITY OF GULFPORT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 50% | since 06/23/2019 |
| HARRISON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 50% | since 06/23/2019 |
| THOMAS, EUGENE | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/23/2019 |
| DUMAL, JENNIFER | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/23/2019 |
| MCCOO, MYRON | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 08/19/2019 |
| MORACE, BRANDIE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 06/23/2019 |
| NICAUD, KENT | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/23/2019 |
| ZELENKA, HALEY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/23/2019 |
| NOONAN, PEGGY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2020 |
| STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/23/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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.
What families pay in MS
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.
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 255290. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-29, 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.