J G Alexander Nursing Center
25112 Highway 15, Union, MS 39365 · For profit - Individual · 60 certified beds · (601) 774-5065 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has 3 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $10,868 in federal fines (most recent 2025-01-30)
- its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 2 to 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 33.0% | 20.5% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.6% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.0% | 1.4% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 11.4% | 2.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 1.6% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.9% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 30.2% | 19.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.8% | 23.8% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 97.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 11.2% | 6.3% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 36.4% | 20.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.8% | 21.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.8% | 27.7% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.2% | 15.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.97 | 2.43 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 4.37 | 2.86 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
30.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 35 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 54.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 22 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 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 39% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 30.0%CMS range 19.2–42.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.6%CMS range 7.0–17.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 54.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 36.4% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 45.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 11.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.7%CMS range 4.2–13.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.49 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 56.3 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.37 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.87 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.47 is at or above 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 4.86 on weekdays — 35% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.06 to 0.42 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% 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
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.
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.
16 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · G2025-01-30 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician of a significant change in condition, as evidenced by the facility did not notify the physician of a resident's 33-pound weight loss of 17 percent (%) of total body weight, persistent drowsiness affecting oral intake, and the failure to implement dietary recommendations which delayed necessary medical interventions and contributed to continued weight loss for one (1) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #45) Cross Reference F692 and F758 Findings included: On 01/27/2025 at 1:01 PM, during an observation and interview with Resident #45's family member, the resident was in his room for lunch. He was drowsy and did not wake up for the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) who was attempting to feed him. He eventually woke up to eat two (2) small bites of food when encouraged by the family member. The family member expressed concern that the resident had lost approximately 20 pounds since being discharged from a behavioral health hospital in March 2024. During an observation an interview…
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.
- Actual harm · G2025-01-30 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident did not experience a significant weight loss of over 10% in six months, as evidenced by Resident #45 was observed to be lethargic and was unable to intake appropriate nutrition to sustain weight. Resident #45 did not have Registered Dietitian (RD) interventions implemented when ordered and did not have medications reviewed for one (1) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #45) Cross Reference F580 and F758 Findings included: During an observation and interview on 01/27/2025 at 1:01 PM, with Resident #45's family member, the resident was in his room for lunch. He was drowsy and did not wake up for the CNA who was attempting to feed him. He eventually woke up to eat two (2) small bites of food when encouraged by the family member. The family member expressed concern that the resident had lost approximately 20 pounds since being discharged from a behavioral health hospital in March 2024. During an observation on 01/28/2025 at 12:10 PM, Resident #45 was in the dining hall but…
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.
- Actual harm · G2025-01-30 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident received a Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR) as required for psychotropic medications. Specifically, the resident was prescribed Rexulti and Trileptal for behavioral health needs in April 2024 but had not undergone a GDR for over ten (10) months. Resident #45 exhibited excessive drowsiness, missing multiple meals, and significant weight loss exceeding 10 percent (%) over six (6) months for one (1) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #45) Cross Reference F580 and F692 Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled Free From Unnecessary Psychotropic Concerns, revised September 2022, revealed, The facility will ensure based on the comprehensive assessment of the resident that .b. Residents who use psychotropic drugs receive gradual dose reductions, and behavioral interventions, unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to discontinue these drugs .i. Dose reductions will occur in modest increments over adequate periods of time to minimize…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-30 · tag F0577 — widespreadAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and resident rights and responsibilities guide review, the facility failed to ensure residents' rights to be informed of and have ready access to the most recent State survey results for all 57 residents residing in the facility during three (3) of three (3) days of survey.Findings include:A record review of the document A Matter of Rights: A Guide to Your Rights and Responsibilities as a Resident, undated, revealed .In addition, you have the right.to review the results of the most recent survey of our facility, and any plans to correct deficiencies.Our policies and procedures.1. We will post the results of the most recent inspection of our facility, together with any plan of correction currently in effect. We encourage residents and family members to review these.On 4/29/26 at 1:39 PM, during an interview in the Resident Council meeting, seven (7) residents with Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) scores of thirteen (13) to (15), which indicated they were cognitively intact, were present. All (7) residents reported they were unaware 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during care for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for perineal and catheter care. Resident #7.Findings include:A review of the facility's policy, Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) Policy, revealed, To reduce the transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in residents of the facility by implementing Enhanced Barrier Precautions in accordance with guidelines from CDC (Center of Disease Control). Enhanced Barrier Precautions will be implemented for residents who.have indwelling medical devices, including . urinary catheters.have wounds or pressure injuries.Staff must wear gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities. This includes.device care.Signage: Place appropriated to EBP signage on resident closet door or designated area .A record review of the admission Record revealed the facility initially admitted Resident #7 on 7/5/23 and she was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-01-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to label and date food stored in the refrigerator and freezer and failed to dispose of expired food for one (1) of four (4) days of kitchen observations. Findings include: A review of the facility ' s Food Storage Labeling policy, revised on 10/23, revealed: .8.a.i. Identify the food item's use-by date or expiration date . iv. Food in storage units will be surveyed routinely to identify and discard foods that have passed their manufacturer use-by or expiration date . 2. Refrigerator storage weekly On 01/27/25 at 11:14 AM, during an initial tour with the Dietary Manager (DM), the following observations were made: In Refrigerator #1, one (1) package of sliced ham was opened and unlabeled, and a spill of orange juice was observed on the bottom of the refrigerator. In Refrigerator #3, one (1) bag of bacon bits was opened and unlabeled, and (1) package of sliced roast beef with a use-by date of 09/12/24, received on 10/06/24, was opened. Additionally, three (3) unopened packs of sliced roast beef had a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-30 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and the facility policy review, the facility failed to honor residents' rights and dignity by not honoring requests for a second bed rail as an enabler and by posting signs at the head of the bed related to resident care for three (3) of 16 sampled residents: Resident #5, Resident #39, and Resident #54. Findings include: A review of the facility's Resident Rights Policy revised in 09/2022 revealed, . Facility will ensure the resident has the right to a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with and access to persons and services inside and outside the facility. Facility will treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance and enhancement of their quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality. The facility will protect and promote the rights of each resident . Resident #5 On 01/28/25 at 10:51 AM, Resident #5 requested to speak with the State…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-30 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to maintain a record log of bed rail maintenance for two (2) of 16 sampled residents (Resident #5 and Resident #54). Findings Include: A record review of the facility's policy, Side Rail Policy, dated 06/25/18, revealed, It is the policy of this facility to attempt to use appropriate alternatives prior to installing a side or bed rail. If a side or bed rail is used, the facility will ensure correct installation, use, and maintenance of bed rails . Follow the manufacturer's recommendations and specifications for installing and maintaining rails . A record review of the Zenith Series manual revealed . Recommended Maintenance . Regular maintenance of the Long Term Bed is necessary to ensure continuing proper and safe operations . Inspect all fasteners for wear or looseness every six (6) months . On 01/28/25 at 10:51 AM, during an interview and observation, Resident #5 requested to see the State Agency (SA). The resident explained she only had one bed rail on the right side but had asked for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-30 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received received necessary behavioral health services to address psychiatric needs and psychotropic medication management. Specifically, the resident was prescribed Rexulti and Trileptal for behavioral health needs in April 2024 but had not been reassessed by a psychiatric provider for ten (10) months which resulted in Resident #45 exhibiting excessive drowsiness, missing multiple meals, and experiencing a significant weight loss of over (10) percent (%) in six months for one (1) of (16) sampled residents. (Resident #45) Findings included: During an observation and interview on 01/27/2025 at 1:01 PM, Resident #45 was in the dining room being assisted by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 with eating. The resident's family member was also present. The resident mostly slept throughout the meal, awakening briefly when the family member prompted him to eat. The family member stated that she was concerned because the resident had lost approximately 20 pounds since…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-30 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — isolatedHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to sustain corrective actions to prevent recurrence of a previously cited deficiency. Specifically, the facility was cited for failing to label and date food stored in the refrigerator and freezer during an annual recertification survey on 8/3/23 and was cited again for the same deficiency during the current survey, demonstrating that QAPI failed to sustain ongoing monitoring and oversight to prevent recurrence for one (1) of nine (9) deficiencies cited. F812 Findings Include: Record Review of the facility's policy Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program revised September 2022, revealed, .The facility will .5. To establish that the facility's Quality Assurance and Assessment (QAA) committee has made a good faith attempt to correct an identified quality deficiency, a facility will do more than just subjectively assert it has made a good faith attempt; rather, the facility's actions, taken as a whole, will…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-08-03 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure items in the kitchen refrigerator/freezer were dated and labeled and food items were discarded by the expiration date for one (1) of three (3) dietary observations. Findings Include: Review of the facility's policy, Storing: Food and Equipment, undated, revealed, Policy:Team members must store food in a manner that ensures quality, freshness and safeguards against foodborne illness .Procedure Label .Ensure all food items are labeled . Label information. Each label must contain the following information: Product name .Use-by date.Date the product was prepared or opened . Observation and interview on 7/31/23 at 11:10 AM, during a brief initial tour of the kitchen with the Food Service Director (FSD) revealed the following: 1. Observation of Kitchen refrigerator #1: During an observation and interview, there was a plastic container of a liquid which the FSD identified as tomato juice. It had a discard date of 7/28/23 and the FSD explained that it should have been discarded. There were two…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident interview, staff interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to develop and/or implement the comprehensive care plan related to side effects and behavior monitoring for psychotropic medications and the use of an anticoagulant medication for four (4) of (20) residents care plans reviewed. Resident #19, Resident #33, Resident #35, and Resident #160 Findings Include: Record review of the facility's policy, Develop/Implement Comprehensive Care Plan, undated, revealed, The facility will develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident .that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet the resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment . Resident #19 During an observation on 7/31/23 at 1:00 PM, Resident #19 was sitting up in bed with her lunch meal in front of her and was served a whole chicken patty on a bun. Her husband stated that he comes to 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-03 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications by failing to monitor resident behaviors and side effects for psychotropic and anticoagulant medication for three (3) of (11) residents reviewed for medications. Resident #33, Resident #35, and Resident #160 Findings Include: A review of the facility's policy, Use of Psychotropic Drugs, (undated), revealed, Policy: Residents are not to be given psychotropic drugs unless the medication is necessary to treat a specific condition, as diagnosed in the clinical record, and the medication is beneficial to the resident, as demonstrated by monitoring and documentation of the resident's response to the medications .Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines .9. The effects of the psychotropic medications on a resident's physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being will be evaluated on an ongoing basis, such as: .d. In accordance with nurse assessments and medication monitoring parameters consistent with clinical standards of practice.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
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 ensure a medication was securely stored for one (1) of 17 sampled residents. Resident # 10. Findings include: Record review of the facility's policy, Label/Store Drugs and Biologicals, (undated), revealed, .The facility will store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments .and permit only authorized personnel to have access to keys . During an observation on 7/31/23 at 2:30 PM, a container of Dermoplast first aid spray was observed on the back of the commode in Resident #10's bathroom. During an observation and interview with Licensed Practical Nurse #1 (LPN), on 7/31/23 at 2:32 PM, she verified that the can of Dermoplast spray sitting on the back of the commode in Resident #10's bathroom. She explained that she had not been in the resident's bathroom and was not aware that the Dermoplast spray was there. LPN #1 stated that the item should not be stored in the room because another resident could get into the spray and have a negative reaction to it. She verified that Resident #10 did not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-03 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff and resident representative interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a mechanical soft, chopped meat diet was provided for one (1) of five (5) residents observed for dining. Resident #19 Findings Include: Review of the facility's policy, Dental Soft Diet (Mechanical), undated, revealed, . Principle:To use regular foods of a consistency which may be easily chewed and swallowed .Food Groups .Meat, Fish, Fowl .Foods Excluded .Any whole meat . On 7/31/23 at 1:00 PM, during an observation and interview, Resident #19 was sitting up in bed with her lunch meal in front of her on an overbed table. She had a whole chicken patty on a bun on her meal tray and her husband stated that he comes to the facility and assists with feeding her lunch. He explained that Resident #19 had eaten some French fries and a little of the Sherbert but could not eat the chicken patty. He explained that it was in her record that her food was supposed to be chopped. In an interview on 08/01/23 at 01:55 PM, with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #2…
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.
- No harm found · B2025-01-30 · tag F0732 — patternPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to post daily nursing staffing information in a clean and readable format in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors. The postings also failed to include the facility name, date, census, and the total number and actual hours worked per shift for two (2) of four (4) survey days. Findings include: A record review of the facility's policy, Posted Nurse Staffing Information, revised in September 2022, revealed: . The facility posts the following information on a daily basis: 1. Facility Name 2. Current date 3. The total number and actual hours worked by the following categories of licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift: . 4. Resident census. The facility must post the nurse staffing data mentioned above on a daily basis at the beginning of each shift. The data must be posted in a clear and readable format and in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors . On 01/27/25 at 3:00 PM, during a walk-through 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$10,868 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $5,434 — penalty dated 2025-01-30
- $5,434 — penalty dated 2025-01-30
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 THE BEEBE FAMILY — 48 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Staffing | 5 of 5 | 3.3 | +1.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
The other 47 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 47; 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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DELANEY, STEVEN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | 50% | since 05/01/2009 |
| PACE, GARRY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNF | 50% | since 05/01/2009 |
| SHELTON, REBECCA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 05/01/2014 |
| EUBANKS, TONYA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2009 |
| PACE, STEPHEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2009 |
| BELENCHIA, RUSSELL | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2009 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 86% 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 $893K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MS
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Mississippi Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 255318. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-30, 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.