BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Bedford Care Center of Mendenhall has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's operations and care quality. Ranked #147 out of 200 in Mississippi, it falls in the bottom half of state facilities and is the second option out of two in Simpson County, meaning there is only one local facility with a better reputation. The facility is worsening, with issues increasing from three in 2024 to four in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength, earning a rating of 4 out of 5 stars, but the turnover rate is a concerning 68%, well above the state average. The facility has incurred $39,354 in fines, indicating compliance issues, and while RN coverage is average, there have been critical incidents including a resident suffering a third-degree burn due to inadequate supervision and failure to implement safety measures, as well as a serious issue where a resident's tobacco was taken without notice, causing distress. Overall, while there are some staffing strengths, the facility's serious deficiencies and compliance problems raise significant concerns for potential residents and their families.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Mississippi
- #147/200
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 68% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $39,354 in fines. Lower than most Mississippi facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 40 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Mississippi. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 20 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)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
22pts above Mississippi avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
20 points above Mississippi average of 48%
The Ugly 20 deficiencies on record
Feb 2025
4 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 observations, interviews, record reviews and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure resident rights were honored as evidenced by Resident #44 was not allowed to get out of bed a...
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** Based on observations, interviews, facility policy review, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a com...
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 observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents who use enabling devices have physician orders as part of the professional stand...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow infection prevention guidelines by i...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
3 deficiencies
2 IJ (2 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL
(K)
📢 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 multiple residents
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plan interventions to prevent burns and for the use of tobacco for one (1...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(K)
📢 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 multiple residents
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision to prevent a burn from hot coffee for one (1) of seven (7) sampled resid...
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 F0561
(Tag F0561)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's right for self-determination as evidenced by facility staff taking a resident's chewing tobacco without ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
11 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interviews, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to keep the call light within the resident's reach for two (2) of three (3) observations. Resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0583
(Tag F0583)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a dignified living envi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that tube placement was checked prior to flushing the enteral feeding tube with water for one...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure cautionary signage was posted related to oxygen usage for one (1) of one (1) resident reviewe...
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, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to discard expired medications and ensure that opened multi-dose vials were dated when opened for two (2) of two (2) m...
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, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure infection control measures were consistently implemented to prevent the possible spread of inf...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review and facility policy review, the facility the facility failed to provide influenza and/or pneumococcal vaccinations as requested per their signed consents for four (4...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0887
(Tag F0887)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to administer the COVID-19 vaccine as requested and consented for one (1) of 21 residents reviewed for COVID-19 vacci...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interviews, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide a private meeting space for the resident council members monthly meetings for six (6) of six ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0574
(Tag F0574)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, interviews and facility policy review the facility failed to provide contact information for filing grievances or complaints concerning any suspected violation of the State or F...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staffing information was posted in a prominent place readily accessible to resident and visitors for three ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2021
2 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 staff interview, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to accurately code the admission Minimum...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure the resident received by nasal cannula oxygen at the ordered flow rate for one (1) of two (2) residents ...
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?"
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $39,354 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 20 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $39,354 in fines. Higher than 94% of Mississippi facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade F (6/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Bedford Of Mendenh's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH 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 Bedford Of Mendenh Staffed?
CMS rates BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 68%, which is 22 percentage points above the Mississippi average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 69%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Bedford Of Mendenh?
State health inspectors documented 20 deficiencies at BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH during 2021 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, 14 with potential for harm, and 3 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 Bedford Of Mendenh?
BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH 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 BEDFORD CARE CENTERS, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 60 certified beds and approximately 56 residents (about 93% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in MENDENHALL, Mississippi.
How Does Bedford Of Mendenh Compare to Other Mississippi Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Mississippi, BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (68%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Bedford Of Mendenh?
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?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the facility's high staff turnover rate.
Is Bedford Of Mendenh Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH 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 Bedford Of Mendenh Stick Around?
Staff turnover at BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH is high. At 68%, the facility is 22 percentage points above the Mississippi average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 69%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Bedford Of Mendenh Ever Fined?
BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH has been fined $39,354 across 3 penalty actions. The Mississippi average is $33,472. 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 Bedford Of Mendenh on Any Federal Watch List?
BEDFORD CARE CENTER OF MENDENH 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.