WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
West Tennessee Post Acute in Jackson, Tennessee has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average but still has room for improvement. It ranks #159 out of 298 facilities in Tennessee, placing it in the bottom half, and #3 out of 6 in Madison County, meaning only two local options are better. Unfortunately, the facility's performance is worsening, with issues increasing from 2 in 2024 to 7 in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength with a rating of 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 52%, which is average compared to the state. Notably, there have been no fines, and there is more RN coverage than 82% of Tennessee facilities, which is a positive aspect as RNs are crucial for catching potential issues. However, there are several concerns. Recent inspections revealed that food items were not properly labeled or dated, creating risks for residents. Additionally, there were incidents of inadequate hand hygiene by staff and failures in infection control practices, such as not cleaning equipment properly. While there are strengths in staffing and RN coverage, these specific incidents indicate that the facility needs to address significant operational and safety issues.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Tennessee
- #159/298
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 52% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Tennessee facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 60 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Tennessee nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 14 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
Near Tennessee average (2.8)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near Tennessee avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 14 deficiencies on record
May 2025
7 deficiencies
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 policy review, medical record review, and interview the facility failed to complete a baseline care plan within 48 hour...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on the facility protocols, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to monitor bowel movements for 1 of 1...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to follow Physician Orders for ox...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 42, Chapter IV, Subchapter G Part 483 review, medical record review, observation...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were proper...
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 policy review, medical record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure practices to prevent ...
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 facility policy review, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure personal resident food items were labeled and dated for 2 of 2 nutrition rooms reviewed for proper food stor...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
2 deficiencies
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 policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were properly stored and secured when 1 of 6 staff members (Registered Nurse (RN A) left medications unatt...
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 policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure practices to prevent th...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
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 review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual v 1.17.1, October 2019, medical re...
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 policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were labeled and stored appropriately when unsecured medications were observed in 1 of 58 resident rooms (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy review, medical record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that 4 of 15 sampled res...
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 policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, and served under sanitary conditions as evidenced by opened, unlabeled, and undated food in...
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 policy review, observation, and interview the facility failed to ensure practices to prevent the potential spread of in...
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 major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Tennessee facilities.
- • 14 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is West Tennessee Post Acute's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Tennessee, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is West Tennessee Post Acute Staffed?
CMS rates WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 52%, compared to the Tennessee average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at West Tennessee Post Acute?
State health inspectors documented 14 deficiencies at WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE during 2023 to 2025. These included: 14 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates West Tennessee Post Acute?
WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE 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 LINKS HEALTHCARE GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 67 certified beds and approximately 59 residents (about 88% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in JACKSON, Tennessee.
How Does West Tennessee Post Acute Compare to Other Tennessee Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Tennessee, WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (52%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting West Tennessee Post Acute?
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 West Tennessee Post Acute Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE 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 3-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Tennessee. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at West Tennessee Post Acute Stick Around?
WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE has a staff turnover rate of 52%, which is 6 percentage points above the Tennessee average of 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 West Tennessee Post Acute Ever Fined?
WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE 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 West Tennessee Post Acute on Any Federal Watch List?
WEST TENNESSEE POST ACUTE 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.