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

Diversicare Of Shelby

1108 Church Street, Shelby, MS 38774 · For profit - Corporation · 60 certified beds · (662) 398-5117 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (662) 398-5117 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
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)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)

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) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
1/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
Pharmacy
Walmart13.5 mi
710 N Davis Ave · (662) 846-6008 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1020 Beale St · (662) 398-7278 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Rainey's Lake Rd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 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.

Overall rating3★
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 increased27.1%20.5%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.5%6.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.4%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.5%2.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%1.6%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.1%3.1%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened18.7%19.6%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication11.2%23.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.3%97.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers8.4%6.3%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control25.7%20.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.8%21.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%2.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine86.8%84.6%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.6%27.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit21.1%15.5%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days3.762.431.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.272.861.80worse

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

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

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

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

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

36.9% 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 30 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

36.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
57.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.39U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.16hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.09hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 57.6% 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 33 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

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

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF36.9%CMS range 25.5–51.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.4%CMS range 6.2–15.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge57.6%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 discharge60.6%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 discharge54.5%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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting96.7%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 stay1.8%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 worsened7.4%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization8.3%CMS range 4.8–15.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.951.02Oct 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

0.42
RN hours/ resident / day
0.78
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.96
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.16
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.26
RN hoursweekends
41.7%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 56.8 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 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 3.16 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.96 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 2.90 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.27 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.49 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-01)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-05-22)

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.

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-01 · 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, Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) staffing data review and facility policy review, the facility failed to submit PBJ data accurately to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for one (1) of four (4) quarters reviewed. 2nd Quarter 2025 (January 1, 2025, through March 31, 2025) Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Payroll Based Journal Entry Submission, dated 2022, revealed, Procedure .7. Hours that each team member works each day must be submitted. Per CMS training hours and corporate team member hours may be included if the team member is providing direct care or performing direct care duties . Review of the PBJ Staffing Data Report revealed the facility triggered for excessively low weekend staffing for the 2nd quarter, 2025 (January 1, 2025, through March 31, 2025). During an interview on 6/30/25 at 12:40 PM, the Human Resource Coordinator revealed the facility used a phone application (APP) for their payroll time clock system. At times, the APP did not work properly and during those times, the employee's…

    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 · Dcited before2025-07-01 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain a clean, safe, and homelike environment in one (1) of fifty-five (55) resident rooms observed. This deficient practice resulted in a room environment with visible water damage and possible mold growth, which may pose a health risk to the resident occupying the room. room [ROOM NUMBER] B. Findings include: A review of the facility ' s policy, Types of Maintenance, with no date, revealed, Routine Maintenance. This is the most frequently done activity of all and is done by performing routine and scheduled maintenance of the property . On 6/29/2025 at 11:30 AM, during an observation, room [ROOM NUMBER] on the B-side was noted to have a large, irregular-shaped light brown and black discoloration on the far wall, extending approximately two (2) feet across the ceiling and approximately two (2) feet down the wall. On 6/30/2025 at 8:38 AM, during an observation with the Infection Control Nurse, she verified 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 · Dcited before2025-07-01 · 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 observation, resident/staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for nail care for one (1) of 28 sampled residents. Resident #10 Findings Include: The facility provided a statement on letterhead with an effective date of October 2024 that revealed, Policy: Care plans will be developed for all patients and residents based upon the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) manual guidelines. Care plans are developed by the interdisciplinary team and revised as needed according to resident and patient status or change. Record review of Resident #10's Care Plan Report revealed under, Focus: Self-care deficit due to: Recent surgery for trans metatarsal amputation of left foot. Additionally revealed under, Interventions/Tasks: Nail, hair, and oral care daily as needed. On 6/29/25 at 11:55 AM an observation and interview with Resident #10 revealed fingernails on both hands were long, jagged, and measured approximately three-eighths (3/8) inches in length from the fingertip. She stated she would like them trimmed and explained that her…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to perform nail care for a resident requiring assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) for one (1) of 28 sampled residents. Resident #10 Findings Include: The facility provided a statement on letterhead that read, Policy: Proper name of the facility uses Clinical Nursing Skills and Techniques, [NAME]. [NAME], as a supplementary policy and procedure care guide. An observation and interview with Resident #10 on 6/29/25 at 11:55 AM revealed she was lying in bed with long fingernails bilaterally that measured approximately three-eighths (3/8) of an inch long and were jagged. She admitted that staff had told her they would trim them, but no one ever came. She stated that her nails had never been as long as they are now and she wanted them trimmed. An observation and interview with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 on 6/30/25 at 8:35 AM confirmed Resident #10's long nails. She stated the treatment nurse was responsible for trimming the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to use Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for a resident with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) for one (1) of 16 residents on EBP reviewed.(Resident #206). Findings include: Review of the policy titled, Proper Name Infection Control Guide, dated 2025, revealed Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) refer to the expanded use of PPE (personal protective equipment) and involve the use of gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities that provide opportunities for transfer of MDROs (multidrug-resistant organisms). Nursing home residents with indwelling medical devices are at especially high risk of both acquisition of and colonization with MDROs. Indwelling devices, e.g., (for example) central lines. Review of the Order Summary Report for Resident #206 revealed an order for Cefepime Intravenous (IV) solution 2 (two) GM/100 ML (grams/milliliter): administer two grams intravenously twice daily, with a start date of 6/26/25 and an end date of 7/06/25. IV-PICC:…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-22 · 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 interviews, record review and facility document review, the facility failed to submit accurate staffing information into the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) system for one (1) of four quarters reviewed. First quarter 2024 Findings Include: Record review of a typed document on facility letterhead, dated 5/21/24 and signed by the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA) revealed Staffing: It is the practice of (Proper name of the facility) to assure that adequate staffing is maintained to provide the necessary care and services for each resident. Staffing expectations are based on resident acuity and needs and may fluctuate based on the center population as identified in the facility assessment. The center conducts work force management meetings daily to discuss open positions, open shifts and call ins as related to patient needs. We continue to actively recruit staff offering various incentives. Record review of the PBJ (Payroll-Based Journal) Staffing Data Report revealed the facility submitted excessively low weekend staffing data for the 1st quarter 2024 (October…

    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 · Dcited before2024-05-22 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide blinds or window coverings in good repair for one (1) of 60 resident rooms observed for a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. room [ROOM NUMBER]. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy Work Orders and Paging, effective September 1, 2014, revealed, Purpose, To establish a productive procedure for communicating and coordinating the needs of the residents and employees from the Maintenance Department . Work Orders, TELS . is a Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS). Employees shall complete Work Orders through TELS. When a verbal request for maintenance is received from center personnel, maintenance staff should request that a work order be submitted . An observation of room [ROOM NUMBER] on 5/19/24 at 1:00 PM, revealed the window blind had broken slats creating a 12 by six (6) inch opening on the right side through which the parking lot was visible. In an interview on 5/20/24 at 9:35 AM,…

    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 before2024-05-22 · 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 observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for a resident receiving an enteral feeding (Resident #1), and failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for a resident receiving antipsychotic medication (Resident #54) for two (2) of nineteen care plans reviewed. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Care Plans with a revision date of October 2021 revealed, Policy: Care plans will be developed for all patients and residents based upon the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) manual guidelines. Care plans are developed by the interdisciplinary team and revised as needed according to resident and patient status or change. This document was dated 5/21/24 and signed by the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator. Resident #1 Record review of Resident #1's care plan revealed, Focus: (Proper name of Resident #1) has PEG (Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy) tube placed and is at risk for complications R/T (related to) feeding tube .Interventions . every shift Jevity 1.5 @ (at) 65…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-22 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and record review and facility document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who received enteral nutrition received appropriate treatment and services, as evidenced by, the facility's failure to administer an enteral feeding according to the physician's order for one (1) of 11 residents with a feeding tube. Resident #1 Findings Include: Record review of a typed document on facility letterhead, dated 5/21/24 and signed by the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator revealed, Standards of Practice: The expectation set forth by (Proper Name of the facility) is that nurses comply with current standards of practice in terms of following physician's orders. This includes following orders for medication and enteral feedings. An observation on 5/19/2024 at 12:25 PM, revealed Resident #1 with his eyes closed lying in bed A bottle of Jevity 1.5 was hanging via pump, which was turned off. An observation on 5/19/2024 at 3:15 PM, revealed Resident #1 lying in bed with his eyes closed. A bottle of Jevity 1.5 was hanging via pump, which was turned…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-05 · 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to refer a resident to the appropriate agency for a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) following an inpatient Geri-psych admission with a new psychiatric diagnosis and new psychiatric medications for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents reviewed for PASARR. Resident #16. Findings include: Record review of a typed document on facility letterhead dated 1/4/22 provided and signed by the Administrator revealed (Formal Name of Facility) go by the State Guidelines on performing PASSARS. We do not have a Passar Policy. Record review of the Medical Diagnosis List for Resident #16 revealed a diagnosis of Schizophrenia, Unspecified, with a date of 11/19/19. Record review revealed there was no Change in Status Form completed for Resident #16, related to the inpatient admission to Geri-psych on 11/8/19 during which the resident received a new psychiatric diagnosis of Schizophrenia, dated 11/19/19, and a new physician's order for new…

    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
  • No harm found · B2024-05-22 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    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 accurately complete section P of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for one (1) of four (4) residents residing in the facility with a wander alert bracelet. Resident #24 Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Process Guideline undated, revealed Process: The CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment User's Manual 3.0 will provide the framework and directions to completing the RAI process. All items in the MDS are to be coded per the instructions of the CMS Long-Term Care Facility Assessment User's Manual MDS 3.0. An observation of Resident #24, on 5/19/2024 at 12:16 PM, revealed she was sitting on the edge of the bed. A wander alert bracelet was observed on her left ankle. Record review of the Order Summary Report with active orders as of 5/20/24, revealed an order dated 7/03/2023, Wanderguard to left ankle. Check placement and function Record review of Resident #24's quarterly MDS with…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to DIVERSICARE HEALTHCARE — 44 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 52.6+0.4 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.5+0.5 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.0≈ chain avg
Quality measures 2 of 53.5-1.5 vs chain
The other 43 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)
1 of 5Diversicare Of BessemerBessemer, AL 1 of 5Diversicare Of HaysvilleHaysville, KS 1 of 5Diversicare Of MeridianMeridian, MS 1 of 5Diversicare Of Oak RidgeOak Ridge, TN 1 of 5Diversicare Of OxfordOxford, AL 1 of 5Diversicare Of RipleyRipley, MS 1 of 5Diversicare Of SedgwickSedgwick, KS 1 of 5Diversicare Of SouthavenSouthaven, MS 1 of 5Lampasas Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterLampasas, TX 1 of 5Windsor HouseHuntsville, AL 2 of 5Diversicare Of AmoryAmory, MS 2 of 5Diversicare Of ArabArab, AL 2 of 5Diversicare Of BatesvilleBatesville, MS 2 of 5Diversicare Of BoazBoaz, AL 2 of 5Diversicare Of BrookhavenBrookhaven, MS 2 of 5Diversicare Of ChanuteChanute, KS 2 of 5Diversicare Of Council GroveCouncil Grove, KS 2 of 5Diversicare Of EuporaEupora, MS 2 of 5Diversicare Of FoleyFoley, AL 2 of 5Diversicare Of MontgomeryMontgomery, AL 2 of 5Diversicare Of Moss PointMoss Point, MS 2 of 5Diversicare Of Pell CityPell City, AL 2 of 5Diversicare Of TupeloTupelo, MS 2 of 5St Martin's In The PinesIrondale, AL 3 of 5Chisolm Trail Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterLockhart, TX 3 of 5Diversicare Of Copper BasinCopperhill, TN 3 of 5Diversicare Of LulingLuling, TX 3 of 5Diversicare Of OneontaOneonta, AL 3 of 5Diversicare Of QuitmanQuitman, MS 3 of 5Diversicare Of RiverchaseBirmingham, AL 3 of 5Park PlaceSelma, AL 3 of 5Yorktown Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterYorktown, TX 4 of 5Baron House Of HueytownHueytown, AL 4 of 5Diversicare Of Big SpringsHuntsville, AL 4 of 5Diversicare Of HutchinsonHutchinson, KS 4 of 5Diversicare Of LanettLanett, AL 4 of 5Diversicare Of WinfieldWinfield, AL 4 of 5Hartford Health CareHartford, AL 5 of 5Diversicare Of GreensboroGreensboro, AL 5 of 5Diversicare Of LarnedLarned, KS

Showing 40 of 43; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
DAC OPCO MISSISSIPPI LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 04/01/2022
DAC OPCO, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST61%since 01/27/2022
CHRISTIAN, ZINAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/06/2025
RATNER, ERANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2022
BODIE, REBECCAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2022
KOHN, BRIANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/13/2024
NEE, STEPHENIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/20/2023
WEISHAAR, MATTHEWIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$6.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+12.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$335K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 83%Medicare 6%Other / private 11%

About 83% 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 $335K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$265per resident / day
operating cost
$8,064per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$303per 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 255293. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-01, 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