GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Grenada Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center has received an F Trust Grade, indicating significant concerns regarding care quality and management. It ranks #165 out of 200 facilities in Mississippi, placing it in the bottom half of nursing homes in the state, and #2 out of 2 in Grenada County, meaning there is only one local option deemed better. The facility is showing signs of improvement as the number of issues decreased from 6 in 2024 to just 1 in 2025, but it still has a high total of 31 issues, including critical incidents where residents were allowed to leave the facility unsupervised, posing serious risks. Staffing is a relative strength with a turnover rate of 37%, which is below the state average, but the overall health inspection rating is only 2 out of 5 stars, indicating below-average performance in care quality. Additionally, the facility has incurred $15,024 in fines, which is average but could suggest ongoing compliance issues that families may want to consider.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Mississippi
- #165/200
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 37% turnover. Near Mississippi's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $15,024 in fines. Lower than most Mississippi facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 28 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Mississippi. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 31 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (37%)
11 points below Mississippi average of 48%
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Mississippi average (2.6)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near Mississippi avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 31 deficiencies on record
Aug 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0628
(Tag F0628)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide written transfer notice to a resident's representative for one (1) of nine (9) residents records revi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility did not report an allegation of abuse to the State Agency within two (2) hours after the incident reporte...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff completed competency skills check-off and completed Enhanced Barrier Precautions training prior to caring for residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to prevent the possibilit...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Data
(Tag F0851)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on staff interview and record review the facility failed to submit accurate data into the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) system for one (1) of four (4) quarters reviewed. Second quarter 2024.
Find...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Comprehensive Assessments
(Tag F0636)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete an Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) no later than 14 days of the Assessment Reference Date (ARD) for o...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0638
(Tag F0638)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete a Quarterly Minimum Data Se...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
14 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff and resident interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to respect the right of a re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #181
Record review of CONSENT FOR CARDIOPULMONARY RESUSCITATION (CPR) form, for Resident #181, signed by her Resident R...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff, resident interview and resident representative interview, record review and facility policy review ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to complete a baseline care plan, withi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #229
A record review of Resident # 229's care plan, date initiated 4/21/23 revealed, Focus The resident uses antidepres...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff and resident interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to include a resident in the...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to assure that services being provided meet professional standards of quality as evidenced by staff failed to sig...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide professional standards of practice to a resident related to application and documenta...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on staff interview, record and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications as evidenced by no monitoring for side effects of psychotropic medicat...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure that the medication error rate was no greater than 5% during a medication administration observation, f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure Drugs and biological's used in the facility were stored in accordance with currently accepted professio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interviews, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to prevent the possible spread of infection as evidenced by staff failed to remove gloves and perfo...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident interviews, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide activit...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to properly label and store food items i...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
2 deficiencies
2 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement care plan inte...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide supervision to preven...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2022
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0809
(Tag F0809)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff and resident interviews, record review and policy review, the facility failed to provide snacks between meals for residents, as evidenced by the observation of a prepared r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, staff interviews, facility policy review, and record review, the facility failed to adhere to the kitchen cleaning schedule, failed to store resident plate covers and utensils u...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0925
(Tag F0925)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, staff interviews, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to maintain food storage, preparation, and service areas free of visible signs of insects and/or rodents,...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2020
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, staff interview, and facility statement, the facility failed to accurately code a Minimum Data Set (MDS)...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on facility policy review, record review and staff interview the facility failed to implement the care plan related to a diet order for one (1) of 22 residents care plans reviewed, Resident #89....
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Medication Cart - Hall A
An interview and observation of the medication cart on Hall A, on 02/17/2020 at 1:55 PM, with LPN #3, revealed, a multi-use vial of Insulin Lispro, with a handwritten, opened ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to provide housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a safe, clean, comfortable, homelike environ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary environment and store food in a manner to prevent the likelihood of foodborne il...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 37% turnover. Below Mississippi's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 31 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $15,024 in fines. Above average for Mississippi. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade F (14/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Staffed?
CMS rates GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 37%, compared to the Mississippi average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center?
State health inspectors documented 31 deficiencies at GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER during 2020 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 27 with potential for harm, and 2 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center?
GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by NEXION HEALTH, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 95 certified beds and approximately 94 residents (about 99% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in GRENADA, Mississippi.
How Does Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Compare to Other Mississippi Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Mississippi, GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (37%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Mississippi. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Stick Around?
GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 37%, 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 Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center Ever Fined?
GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER has been fined $15,024 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Mississippi average of $33,229. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Grenada Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center on Any Federal Watch List?
GRENADA REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER 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.