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

Tishomingo Comm Living Center

1410 West Quitman Street, Iuka, MS 38852 · For profit - Corporation · 73 certified beds · (662) 423-3422 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (662) 423-3422 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 immediate-jeopardy citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$10,361 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • the CMS record shows $10,361 in federal fines (most recent 2025-12-18)

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1310 Main St · (662) 471-9416 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1411 W Quitman St · (662) 423-9039 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
600 Battleground Dr · (662) 423-9595 · Call to confirm hours
Park
118 S Pearl St · (662) 423-3781 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
800 Battleground Dr · (662) 423-6891

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 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 rating1★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased10.2%20.5%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight12.0%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.8%1.4%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.3%2.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.6%1.6%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.2%3.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened37.8%19.6%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication43.0%23.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%97.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.5%6.3%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control21.4%20.7%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table35.8%21.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.2%2.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.2%84.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission16.8%27.7%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.8%15.5%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.252.431.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.822.861.80typical

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

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

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

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

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

52.8% 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 125 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
14.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
15.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.17U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy

Met the expected recovery: 15.0% 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 40 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 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 16% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 SNF52.8%CMS range 44.3–60.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF14.0%CMS range 10.2–17.810.7%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 discharge15.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge12.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge12.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified95.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.6%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 worsened4.8%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 hospitalization7.9%CMS range 5.0–12.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.961.02Oct 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

0.76
RN hours/ resident / day
0.88
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.95
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.59
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.49
RN hoursweekends
30.5%
Total nursing turnover
9.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 73 beds and averages 66.9 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.95 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 3.16 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.76 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.88 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 30% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-12-18)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-01)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-12-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and a secure environment to prevent the elopement of one (1) of five (5) residents who were at risk for elopement and wandering, Resident #68.On 12/10/25, at approximately 2:53 PM a member of the facility staff reported in the staff meeting that Resident #68 was found inside the pharmacy across the street. At 2:55 PM Resident # 68 was located by facility staff, approximately 100 yards away from the facility across a busy two-lane street inside the pharmacy where he was observed standing, laughing and conversing with the pharmacy staff. The temperature at the time was cloudy and 55 degrees; the resident was dressed in lace up tennis shoes, pants and a long sleeve shirt.The facility's failure to provide adequate supervision to prevent the elopement of Resident #68 placed this resident, and other residents at risk for wandering and elopement, in a situation that was likely to cause serious…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · F2025-12-18 · tag F0851 — widespread
    Electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
    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 submit accurate staffing data into the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) system for one (1) of four (4) quarters reviewed. 4th Quarter 2025. Findings Include:Record review of the facility policy titled, Staffing Hours-Monitoring of Policy and Procedure undated, revealed, Purpose: To assure the facility staffing meet federal and state guidelines. Record review of PBJ Staffing Data Report CASPER Report 1705D FY (Fiscal Year) Quarter 4 2025 (July 1-September 30), revealed the facility triggered on this report for excessively low weekend staffing.During an interview on 12/17/2025 at 3:20 PM, the Administrator revealed that after auditing the low weekend staffing data, she discovered that the data submitted to PBJ was inaccurate. She revealed that both she and the Director of Nurses (DON) had worked some weekends, and their salary hours were not accurately converted to hourly. The Administrator also revealed that, after further investigation into the excessively low weekend staffing, it was discovered…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · tag F0628 — isolated
    Provide 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide written notification to the resident/representative regarding bed hold when the resident was sent to the hospital for two (2) of two residents reviewed for hospitalization. Resident #1 and Resident #65Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled, Bed hold Policy and Procedure revealed Policy: Before the facility transfers a resident to the hospital or allows a resident to go on therapeutic leave, written information should be provided to the resident and family member or legal representative specifying the following information: (i) The duration of the bed-hold policy under the State plan, if any, during which the resident is permitted to return and resume residence in the facility; and (ii) The policies regarding bed-hold periods, which should be consistent .In the case of an emergency transfer, a written notification should be given to the family, surrogate, or representative within 24 hours of 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on resident and staff interviews and record review, and the facility policy the facility failed to notify the provider of an increase in blood pressure for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for blood pressure monitoring. Resident #55 Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled, Blood Pressure, Measuring dated 8/25/24, revealed, Hypertension is usually defined as blood pressure over 140/90 mm/Hg (although the elderly often have persistent systolic readings from 140 to 160 mm/Hg). Hypertension should be reported to the physician. Record review of facility policy titled, Notification of Changes in a Resident's Condition or Status, undated, revealed, It is the policy of this facility to inform the resident, consult with his or her physician, and notify, consistent with his/her authority, the resident's representative of changes in the resident's condition and/or status. The policy also revealed, 1. Nursing services shall be responsible for notifying the resident's attending physician when: . b. There is a significant change in the resident's physical, mental,…

    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 · D2024-08-01 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on resident and staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident's representative in writing and the Ombudsman of the emergency transfer to the hospital for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for hospitalization. Resident #22 Findings include: Record review of letter dated 7/31/24 on facility letterhead revealed, The facility does not have a policy that states the Responsible Party and/or Ombudsman must be notified in writing of Emergency Transfers. During an interview on 07/29/24 at 11:55 AM, Resident #22 revealed she had been in the hospital recently but she did not remember the date of this. An interview with the Administrator on 7/30/24 at 2:10 PM, revealed the notification to the Ombudsman was not provided and the written notification to Resident #22's representative was not provided. She stated the Medical Records Nurse was the person responsible for this and failed to send these notifications due to the resident returning within a few hours of leaving facility and her name was accidentally removed from the transfer list. She confirmed…

    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 · Dcited before2024-08-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interview, record review and the facility policy the facility failed to develop a care plan for a resident with a history of hypertension for one (1) of 19 care plans reviewed. Resident #55 Findings included: Record review of facility policy titled, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, dated 11/22, revealed, A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. The policy also revealed, 7. The comprehensive, person-centered care plan . b. describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, . e. reflects currently recognized standards of practice for problem areas and conditions. 11. Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the resident's conditions change. An interview with Resident #55 on 7/30/24 at 8:50 AM revealed he had a history of hypertension…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident and staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to prevent the possibility of an accident while administering medications for one (1) of four (4) residents observed for medication administration. Resident #34 Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration-General Guidelines with a revision date of 8/25/14 revealed under Procedure .#1. Preparation: e. If it is safe to do so, medication tablets may be crushed or capsules emptied out when a resident has difficulty swallowing . An interview and observation on 07/29/24 at 10:44 AM with Resident #34 revealed that her only problem was a huge pill they give her, and she cannot swallow it. She stated it gets stuck in her throat and she just has to let it dissolve. She revealed she told the nurse this morning, but she told her it would not be much longer, and she would not have to take them anymore. An interview on 7/30/24 at 8:00 AM with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1…

    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 · F2023-06-01 · tag F0801 — widespread
    Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
    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 ensure that the Dietary Manager (DM) had completed required training for dietary management after one year of full-time employment for four (4) or four (4) survey days observed. Findings include: Record review of the facility policy Dietary Manager with a revision date of June 1, 2000 revealed Policy Statement: It is the policy of this facility that the day-to-day functions of the dietary department be under the supervision of a qualified dietary manager . An interview on 5/17/23 at 2:20 PM, with the DM and the Registered Dietician (RD) revealed that the Dietary Manager had been in that position since 5/2022 and had not completed her DM certification course. The DM revealed that she was hired by another Administrator and when the new Administrator started, they discussed the need for her to get her certification, but nothing was ever done. The RD revealed she comes to the facility two times per month. The DM revealed she had one day of training at a sister facility with the Dietary Manager…

    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 · F2023-06-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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 and facility policy review the facility failed to store food in a manner that meets professional standards as evidenced by unlabeled and undated food in the refrigerator, dry food stored uncovered and resident nourishment refrigerators with resident snacks that were unlabeled or undated for two (2) of four (4) survey days. Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Food Storage with a revision date of 8/18/11 revealed . Procedure .2. All foods or food items not requiring refrigeration shall be stored above the floor, on shelves, racks, dollies, or other surfaces which facilitate thorough cleaning, in a ventilated room, not subject to sewage or wastewater backfill or contamination by condensation leakage, rodents, or vermin. All package food, canned foods or food items stored shall be kept clean and dry at all times . 9. All leftover foods are to be stored in covered containers, dated, & labeled. Cooked leftovers are to be used reheating to 180 degrees Fahrenheit. If not used by the third (3rd) day, they are to be discarded.…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-01 · 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 record review, resident interview, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a resident's Advance Directives were honored as evidenced by the facility did not correctly implement the resident's decision on the correct code status for two (2) of 24 resident's reviewed (Resident # 30 and # 51) and failed to have a copy of the Advanced Directive on the medical record for two (2) of 24 residents reviewed. (Resident # 45 and #58) Findings Include: A review of the facility policy titled, Advance Directives, reviewed 11/2022, revealed, Policy Statement The resident has the right to formulate an advance directive, including the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment. Advance directives are honored in accordance with state law and facility policy .Determining Existence of Advance Directive .2. The resident or representative is provided with written information concerning the right to refuse or accept medical or surgical treatment and to formulate an advance…

    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 · D2023-06-01 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    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 and resident interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to respect the dignity of a resident as evidenced by not completely covering the resident's naked body while transporting the resident to the shower for one (1) of 67 resident's observed, Resident #33 Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Dignity and Respect with no revision date revealed under Procedure .#4 Privacy of a resident's body shall be maintained during toileting, bathing, and other activities of personal hygiene, except when staff assistance is needed for the resident's safety. An observation on 05/17/23 at 3:36 PM, revealed Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) #2 pushing Resident #33 down the hall in a shower chair covered in the front with a white facility blanket and no covering over his bare buttocks, which were visible from the back side of the chair as he was being pushed down the hallway. An interview on 5/17/23 at 3:38 PM, with CNA #2 revealed she did not realize that…

    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 · D2023-06-01 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 staff interview, record review and review of the statement regarding the facility's policy, the facility failed to submit a change in status for a Level II PASARR (Pre admission Screening and Resident Review) referral for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed. Resident # 46. Findings Include: Record review of facility policy titled, admission Criteria, dated 4/25/23, revealed, Our facility admits only residents who's medical and nursing care needs can be met. The policy also revealed, All new admissions and readmissions are screened for mental disorders (MD), intellectual disabilities (ID), or related disorders (RD) per the Medicaid Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) process. Record review of the signed Administrator's note on facility letterhead dated 5/17/23 revealed, (Proper name of facility) follows state regulations regarding Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review Level II submissions and resubmissions. The facility does not have a separate policy. An interview with 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-01 · 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 staff interview, record review, and policy review the facility failed to develop a care plan for cardio-pulmonary resuscitation code status (Resident #30 and Resident #51) and implement a care plan by failing to change a humidifier bottle and tubing, and ensuring a resident received humidified oxygen (Resident # 17) for three (3) of 24 resident reviewed. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled, Care Plan-Comprehensive, revealed Policy Statement: It is the policy of the facility to develop comprehensive care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's medical, nursing, and psychosocial needs . Findings Include: Resident #30 A review of Resident #30's care plan titled, I am A CPR status with a review date of [DATE] revealed, Goals I will receive all measures of comfort care, and life sustaining treatment through each review during nursing home stay. A review of the Advance Health Care Directive signed [DATE] by Resident #30 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-01 · 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

    Based on observation, staff interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to change an oxygen (O2) humidifier bottle and tubing weekly as ordered for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for oxygen therapy. Resident #17 Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Education, with a date of September 12, 2013, revealed . Important facts: All tubing is changed once a week and clearly marked with the days date . Record review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration, with a Procedure revised date of August 25, 2014, revealed . Steps in the Procedure . 9 . Be sure there is water in the humidifying jar (if used) and that the water level is high enough that the water bubbles as oxygen flows through .11. Periodically re-check the water level in the humidifying jar . An observation of Resident #17 on 5/15/23 at 11:00 AM, revealed the O2 humidifier bottle dated 4/18/23 with no date on tubing connected to the humidifier. An observation of Resident #17 on 5/16/23 at 2:08 PM, revealed an empty O2 humidifier bottle with date 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.

    Quality of Life and Care 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

$10,361 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $10,361 — penalty dated 2025-12-18

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to COMMUNITY ELDERCARE SERVICES — 17 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 3 of 52.0+1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.3+0.7 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.2+0.8 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 51.8+1.2 vs chain
The other 16 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, per CMS)

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
COMMUNITY ELDERCARE SERVICES, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2000
AMERSON, KIMBERLYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/12/2022
GLYNN, MARGARETIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/19/2008
COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/31/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$7.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+6.9%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$996K
Related-party expense15% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 80%Medicare 12%Other / private 8%

About 80% 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 $996K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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

$278per resident / day
operating cost
$8,456per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$299per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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 255127. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-18, 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