JASPER COUNTY NH
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Jasper County Nursing Home has received a Trust Grade of D, indicating below-average quality and some concerns that families should consider. It ranks #119 out of 200 facilities in Mississippi, placing it in the bottom half, but it is the only nursing home in Jasper County, meaning there are no local alternatives. The facility is showing improvement, with issues decreasing from 8 in 2024 to 2 in 2025. Staffing is a strength, rated 4 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 46%, which is slightly better than the state average. However, there have been serious incidents, including a medication error where a resident was given blood pressure medication intended for another resident, leading to a hospitalization, and a lack of respect for residents' dignity during care. While the home has no fines on record, families should weigh these strengths against the identified weaknesses.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Mississippi
- #119/200
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 46% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Mississippi facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 27 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Mississippi. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Mississippi average (2.6)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Near Mississippi avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record
Jan 2025
2 deficiencies
2 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure services provided met current pro...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to prevent a significant medication error wh...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2024
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain and provide a clean, sanitary, and home-like environment for one (1) of twenty-six (26) re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0604
(Tag F0604)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's right to be free from physical restraints by not identifying and documenting the...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on staff, Resident Representative (RR) interview and record review, the facility failed to provide written notification to the resident or RR of a transfer to an acute care hospital for one (1) ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to obtain a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) for a resident receiving psychotropic medic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0919
(Tag F0919)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an audible call light system for one (1) of (16) rooms obse...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to treat residents in a dignified manner by posting clinical data in a resident room (Resident #85) an...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure grievances raised by resident council members were consistently resolved for six (6) of (12) months.
Find...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interview, record review and facility draft policy review, the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to accommodate resident preferences by not allowing bedfast residents to receive showers as their preferred bathing ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was dependent on staff for personal hygiene received services related to nail ca...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to transmit Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments by the target date, for seven (7) of 20 residents reviewed for...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to discard expired food and failed to serve food in a sanitary manner related to staff touching a resident's food item ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0888
(Tag F0888)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure policies and procedures addressed a process for ensuring the implementation of additional prec...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Mississippi facilities.
- • 15 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • Grade D (45/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Jasper County Nh's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns JASPER COUNTY NH an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Mississippi, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Jasper County Nh Staffed?
CMS rates JASPER COUNTY NH's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 46%, compared to the Mississippi average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Jasper County Nh?
State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at JASPER COUNTY NH during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm, 12 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Jasper County Nh?
JASPER COUNTY NH is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 110 certified beds and approximately 98 residents (about 89% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in BAY SPRINGS, Mississippi.
How Does Jasper County Nh Compare to Other Mississippi Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Mississippi, JASPER COUNTY NH's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (46%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Jasper County Nh?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Jasper County Nh Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, JASPER COUNTY NH has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Mississippi. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Jasper County Nh Stick Around?
JASPER COUNTY NH has a staff turnover rate of 46%, which is about average for Mississippi nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Jasper County Nh Ever Fined?
JASPER COUNTY NH has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Jasper County Nh on Any Federal Watch List?
JASPER COUNTY NH is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.