Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around May 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of October 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Sharkey-issaquena Nursing Home during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Failure to Complete Monthly Medication Regimen Reviews: The facility did not ensure the consultant pharmacist completed required monthly DRRs/MMRs for 12 of 12 months reviewed, affecting all 50 residents. The DON confirmed there was no documentation of the reviews, and the pharmacy consultant stated he had not performed MMRs since the facility reopened after the tornado because his software license expired and he had not obtained another program to complete the reviews.
Failure to submit required PBJ staffing data to CMS. The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate PBJ staffing information for the quarter reviewed. The CFO, who handled payroll reporting for multiple departments, confirmed the submission was not completed due to time constraints and noted payroll had previously been maintained manually after a tornado damaged time clocks. The Administrator and CEO both stated they had been told the PBJ submission was completed, but later learned it had not been submitted.
Advance Directive Rights Not Properly Documented: The facility failed to document that two residents or their RRs were informed of AD rights, including whether an AD existed and whether they wanted information or help formulating one. Staff used an Advance Directive Consent form in the admission packet, but it did not include the same information as the Acknowledgement of Advance Directives form, and the DON reported the facility had no AD policy. Both residents had severe cognitive impairment on MDS review.
Resident care information was posted on a resident's wall and headboard where it was visible to others, including a visitor. The signs listed NPO status, HOB elevation, safe swallow precautions, turn schedule, and leg elevation instructions. Staff said the information was placed there to alert staff and was also available in the chart, Kardex, care plan, MAR, and TAR. The DON identified the posting of personal care information as a dignity and resident rights concern.
A resident with COPD and a BIMS score of 15 reported three missing clothing outfits after laundry, but staff did not initiate the grievance process. Multiple staff members were aware of the missing items, yet the concern was handled informally by searching the laundry area, and the SS designee and LPN confirmed no formal grievance or follow-up was completed.
Failure to Recognize Self-Releasing Seat Belt as a Restraint: A resident with Parkinson’s Disease and severely impaired cognition was observed seated in a wheelchair with a self-releasing seat belt secured across the lap, but the resident could not independently release it. Staff reported the device was used for positioning and to prevent sliding, yet there was no documentation that the resident had been assessed as able to release it independently, and the DON confirmed no restraint assessment had been completed.
Inaccurate and incomplete MDS assessments were identified for three residents. Two residents had Entry and discharge-related MDS assessments left in In Progress status after hospital transfers and returns, and one resident’s MDS was coded as Death in Facility even though the resident died at the hospital after being sent out by EMS. The DON and RN confirmed the coding error and that some assessments were not up to date.
Incomplete Comprehensive Care Planning: The facility failed to develop a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for one resident receiving hospice services and failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for another resident with multiple diagnoses and severe cognitive impairment. The hospice resident’s chart lacked hospice-related goals and interventions, and the other resident had only a baseline care plan. RN and leadership interviews confirmed the care plans were not developed as required.
Care plans were not revised for two residents to match current needs and orders. One resident had significant weight loss and a pressure injury, with orders for supplements and wound care, but the nutritional care plan was not updated. Another resident’s care plan still listed quetiapine 20 mg even though the current order and MAR showed 50 mg daily. The RN, DON, and Administrator acknowledged the care plans were not accurately revised.
A resident with mild dementia and a BIMS score indicating cognitive intactness was observed vaping in the room despite a facility policy stating e-cigarettes may not be kept in resident rooms and residents must be accompanied by staff during smoking times. The resident reported keeping the vape device on hand, receiving vape supplies from family, and not being told vaping was prohibited in the room. The DON was unaware of the in-room vaping, and an oxygen concentrator was present near the resident's chair during observation.
Missing Bed Rail Assessment and Consent: A resident with severe cognitive impairment and diagnoses including encephalopathy, DM2, and unspecified dementia was observed with bed rails in use, including an instance with four half rails raised and another with two half rails raised. Staff confirmed the resident used the rails to assist with turning and repositioning, but RN, DON, and the Administrator all acknowledged there was no bed rail consent, entrapment assessment, or supporting documentation on file.
Medical Director Absent From QAPI Meetings: The facility failed to ensure required QAA/QAPI members participated in QAPI meetings, as the Medical Director was absent from five reviewed meetings. The QAPI policy stated all departments were involved in quality improvement, but sign-in sheets showed no Medical Director attendance. The DON reported he did not attend the meeting she participated in, and the Medical Director stated he had not been informed of the meetings or the information reviewed.
The facility did not monitor or record food temperatures for 30 days due to a lack of a logbook and a functioning thermometer. The Dietary Manager and staff acknowledged the oversight, and the Administrator was unaware of the issue, which could pose health risks to residents.
The facility failed to administer a second-step TB skin test to a resident and 34 employees, contrary to its policy requiring a two-step Mantoux TB skin test for those without a negative test in the last 12 months. The DON confirmed the oversight for the resident, and the Business Office Manager admitted unawareness of the requirement for employees. Interviews with the ADM and DON revealed a lack of awareness of the two-step requirement, indicating a systemic issue in infection control practices.
A resident's dignity was compromised when their urinary catheter bag was left uncovered and visible from the open door of their room. This oversight was confirmed by both an RN and the DON, who acknowledged that the bag should have been covered to prevent potential embarrassment. The resident had been admitted with neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder.
A facility failed to accurately complete a PASARR for a resident with mental illness. The resident's screening incorrectly marked 'No' for mental illness, psychotropic medication use, and substance abuse history, despite diagnoses of schizophrenia and major depressive disorder, and a prescription for Cymbalta. The social services staff admitted to errors in the screening process, and the administrator emphasized the importance of accurate PASARR completion.
A resident admitted with a skin tear on the sacral area received inadequate care due to misidentification of the wound's nature. The DON initially treated the wound with Lantiseptic, inappropriate for a pressure ulcer, until the MD assessed it and changed the treatment to Duoderm. The facility's documentation lacked complete wound measurements, and the Administrator was unaware of the pressure wound, leading to a deficiency in care.
A facility failed to ensure a PRN psychotropic medication for a resident had a stop date, as required by policy and CMS regulations. The resident, diagnosed with Hemiplegia following cerebrovascular disease, received Lorazepam without a stop date or physician re-evaluation. The Administrator confirmed the oversight, acknowledging the need for a stop date to ensure minimal medication use and proper evaluation.
Failure to Complete Monthly Medication Regimen Reviews
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a licensed pharmacist completed the required monthly medication regimen reviews (MMRs) for residents in the facility for 12 of 12 months reviewed, with the potential to affect all 50 residents residing in the facility. The report states that the consultant pharmacist was responsible for conducting monthly drug regimen reviews and that the facility's records contained no documented MMRs completed by the consultant pharmacist for the period reviewed. During interviews, the DON reviewed the facility records and confirmed there was no documentation to verify that the consultant pharmacist completed the required MMRs for the past year. The pharmacy consultant stated he had not been to the facility to perform MMRs since the facility reopened after the tornado in May 2023, explaining that his software license expired while the facility was closed and that he had been unable to obtain another software program to complete the pharmacy reviews. The Administrator also confirmed that the facility did not have MMR documentation for the 12-month period and stated that MMRs were expected to occur in accordance with regulatory requirements.
Failure to Submit Required PBJ Staffing Data
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to electronically submit complete and accurate Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) staffing data to CMS for Fiscal Year Quarter 2, 2026, covering the reporting period of January 1, 2026 through March 31, 2026. A review of the facility’s PBJ Reporting Policy and Procedure showed the facility was required to accurately collect and submit staffing and census information through the CMS PBJ system by established deadlines, supported by documentation. Record review showed the facility did not submit the required PBJ staffing data for the quarter reviewed. During interview, the CFO responsible for payroll reporting confirmed the submission had not been completed and stated that, because of time constraints, she did not complete and submit the PBJ data. She explained that after a tornado in 2023, payroll records had been maintained manually for a period of time due to nonfunctioning time clocks, and that she was responsible for payroll processing for the hospital, nursing home, two clinics, and administrative staff. The Administrator confirmed the PBJ data had not been submitted and stated she had previously been told it was completed. The CEO also stated he expected PBJ data to be submitted in accordance with CMS requirements and was unaware the second quarter submission had not been completed.
Advance Directive Rights Not Properly Documented
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure residents or their Resident Representatives were informed of their rights regarding Advance Directives, including whether an Advance Directive existed and whether they wished to receive information or assistance in formulating one, for two sampled residents. Record review showed no documentation that either resident or their Resident Representative received information about formulating an Advance Directive. The facility’s admission packet contained two separate forms, an Advance Directive Consent form and an Acknowledgement of Advance Directives form, but staff used only the Advance Directive Consent form because Social Services believed it contained the same information, even though she and the DON later confirmed the forms contained different information. Resident #11 was admitted with diagnoses including nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage from the right carotid siphon and bifurcation, and the quarterly MDS showed a BIMS score of 00, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Resident #22 was admitted with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis, and the quarterly MDS showed a BIMS score of 7, also indicating severe cognitive impairment. During interviews, the DON stated she was not exactly sure about the Advance Directive forms and said each resident should have a code status in the chart and an Acknowledgement Form completed on admission. The Administrator stated she thought the Advance Directive Consent forms were to be completed upon admission, and the DON reported the facility did not have a policy regarding Advance Directives.
Resident Care Information Posted in View of Others
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident's right to personal privacy and confidentiality when identifying personal care directions were posted on the resident's wall and headboard where they were visible to others. Resident #33 had signs displayed above the headboard stating Family will do laundry, NPO, Keep HOB elevated at 45 degrees, safe swallow precautions, and turn schedule, and another sign on the wall directing staff to elevate the resident's legs while in bed. These signs remained visible during observations, including when the resident had a visitor in the room. Resident #33 was admitted with aphasia following cerebral infarction and had a PEG tube, was NPO, and received bolus tube feedings every 6 hours. The resident's orders also included keeping the head of bed elevated at least 45 degrees, offloading heels while in bed, and other enteral feeding instructions. Staff interviews confirmed the signs were posted by the MDS nurse and social worker to alert staff to the resident's precautions, and staff stated the same information was also available in the chart, Kardex, care plan, MAR, and TAR. The DON stated that signage containing personal care information on a resident's wall is a dignity issue and a resident rights concern.
Failure to Initiate Grievance Process for Missing Resident Clothing
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure Resident #34’s right to have grievances investigated and resolved after the resident reported three missing clothing outfits. The resident, who was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15 and admitted with COPD, had clothing inventoried on admission. During a Resident Council meeting, the resident reported the clothing had been sent to laundry and not returned, and stated the concern had been shared with staff weeks earlier, including a CNA, with the resident being directed to search the laundry room for the missing items. Interviews showed multiple staff members were aware of the missing clothing, including the CNA, housekeeping supervisor, CNA supervisor, and administrator, but no formal grievance was initiated. The Social Services Designee stated she was unaware of the concern because no grievance had been filed, and the LPN who signed the inventory list confirmed no formal grievance was started and no follow-up actions were completed. The laundry area contained multiple bags of unidentified clothing and unmatched socks, and staff reported there was no reliable method to identify unlabeled clothing.
Failure to Recognize Self-Releasing Seat Belt as a Restraint
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident’s right to be free from physical restraints by not identifying a self-releasing seat belt as a restraint for Resident #21, who was unable to independently release the device. The facility’s restraint policy defined a physical restraint as any device attached or adjacent to the resident’s body that restricts freedom of movement and cannot be easily removed by the resident, and stated restraints should only be used when medically necessary and pursuant to a physician order. During observation, Resident #21 was seated in a wheelchair with a self-releasing seat belt secured across the lap, and the resident was unable to independently release it. Staff interviews showed CNA #1 reported the resident required staff assistance throughout the day and frequently forgot routine tasks due to dementia. RN #2 stated the seat belt was used for positioning and was not considered a restraint, while LPN #1 reported it was used to prevent sliding from the wheelchair but could not provide documentation that the resident could independently release it. The DON reviewed the record and confirmed there was no documentation showing the resident had been assessed and determined capable of independently releasing the seat belt, and acknowledged that if the resident could not independently release it, the device would be considered a restraint. The resident’s record showed diagnoses including Parkinson’s Disease, a BIMS score of 04 indicating severely impaired cognition, and no restraint assessment completed for the self-releasing seat belt.
Inaccurate and Incomplete MDS Assessments
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurately completed and coded for three sampled residents. The facility policy stated that MDS assessments must be completed timely, accurately, and in accordance with CMS requirements, with the MDS Coordinator responsible for scheduling, coding, and transmitting assessments and the DON responsible for ensuring nursing documentation supports MDS coding and care planning. For Resident #2, the record showed the resident was admitted with a diagnosis of cerebral ischemia and later sent out by ambulance, then returned from a hospital stay. The electronic MDS record showed a Discharge Return Anticipated assessment, an Entry assessment, and a Medicare 5-Day assessment all remained in In Progress status, indicating they had not been completed and transmitted to CMS. For Resident #56, the resident was admitted with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was sent to the ER by ambulance, later returned from the hospital, and then departed again by ambulance; the MDS record showed an Entry assessment and a Discharge Return Anticipated assessment remained in In Progress status, and there was no Entry created when the resident returned from the hospital. For Resident #55, the resident was admitted with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and was transported by EMS to the emergency room. The record later showed the responsible party notified the facility that the resident had passed away in the hospital after being discharged there. However, the Discharge MDS coded the resident as Short-term General Hospital, while the Death in Facility MDS coded the resident as Death in Facility, which indicated the resident expired in the facility rather than at the hospital. The DON and RN confirmed the resident died at the hospital and that the MDS was coded inaccurately.
Incomplete Comprehensive Care Planning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for Resident #41 related to hospice services and failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for Resident #42 for all care and services. The facility’s Comprehensive Care Plan Policy stated that a comprehensive care plan shall be developed within seven days after completion of the comprehensive assessment, and the MDS Coordinator was responsible for coordinating the care planning process and ensuring care plans were developed and updated timely. Resident #41 was admitted with COPD, had a BIMS score of 15 indicating cognitive intactness, and had a physician’s order to admit to hospice. Progress notes showed the resident remained on hospice, but the comprehensive care plan did not include hospice-related focus, goals, or interventions. Resident #42 was admitted with diagnoses including encephalopathy, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and unspecified dementia, had a BIMS score of 2 indicating severe cognitive impairment, and the record contained only a baseline care plan dated on admission with no comprehensive care plan. RN #2 acknowledged the care plan for Resident #41 did not reflect hospice services and stated she was behind on developing comprehensive care plans for residents. The DON and Administrator stated they were not aware the care plans had not been developed.
Care Plans Not Updated for Weight Loss, Pressure Injury, and Psychotropic Medication Changes
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to revise the care plan for Resident #2 to reflect significant weight loss and a pressure injury. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including cerebral ischemia and had a quarterly MDS showing a BIMS score of 12, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS also documented weight loss of 5% or more in the last month or 10% or more in the last 6 months, and one unhealed pressure ulcer/injury. The resident had physician orders for a house supplement after meals for weight management, Prostat twice daily to promote wound healing, and treatment for a deep tissue injury to the left heel, but the comprehensive care plan’s focus on nutritional status was not revised to reflect these changes. The facility also failed to revise the care plan for Resident #13 to match current psychotropic medication orders. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including Parkinson’s disease, and the care plan listed interventions for quetiapine fumarate 20 mg. However, the current physician order was for quetiapine fumarate 50 mg daily, and the MAR showed the resident was receiving 50 mg daily. During interview, the MDS/care plan nurse confirmed the care plan still reflected 20 mg and stated it had not been revised to match the current order. The DON and Administrator stated they were not aware the care plans were not being revised to accurately reflect resident care and services.
Smoking and vaping policy not followed for resident using vape in room
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure smoking and vaping activities were assessed, supervised, and conducted in accordance with its smoking policy and resident safety requirements for one resident. The facility policy stated that precautions were to be taken for resident and facility safety, that a smoking safety evaluation would be completed upon admission, that safety measures must be followed to participate in smoking activities, that no e-cigarettes may be kept in resident rooms, and that residents would be accompanied by staff at each smoking time. Resident #51 was admitted with a diagnosis of mild dementia, but the quarterly MDS showed a BIMS score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. During interview, the resident reported vaping in the room, keeping the vape device in the room, and receiving vape supplies from the resident's daughter. The resident also reported not being informed that vaping was prohibited in the room and stated the vape device was used only in the room and kept on the resident's person at all times. During observation, the resident was seen using a vape device in the room prior to dinner, and an oxygen concentrator was present near the resident's chair. The DON stated she was unaware the resident was vaping in the room, the SS Director stated vaping products should be treated the same as tobacco and not used inside the facility, and the Administrator acknowledged the resident had reported vaping in the room and that vaping use had not been considered in relation to oxygen equipment or policy compliance.
Missing Bed Rail Assessment and Consent
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with bed rails had an entrapment assessment and consent completed for the use of the bed rails. Resident #42 was observed in bed with four half bed rails raised on one occasion and two half bed rails raised at the top of the bed on another occasion. CNA #2 stated the resident used the top bed rails to assist with turning and repositioning and confirmed the resident had two bed rails raised at all times while in bed, but should not have had four bed rails raised. LPN #2 also confirmed the resident used the bed rails to assist with moving and rolling over and stated she did not know why the bottom rails were raised. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including encephalopathy, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and unspecified dementia, and the MDS showed a BIMS score of 2, indicating severe cognitive impairment. RN #2 confirmed there was no bed rail consent or other supporting documentation, and stated residents with bed rails in use should have an entrapment assessment and consent completed. The DON reported she was unaware that the resident's bed rail assessment and consent had not been completed, and the Administrator also stated she was unaware that the assessments and consents had not been completed. A record review found no documentation of a bed rail assessment, entrapment assessment, or consent related to the use of bed rails.
Medical Director Absent From QAPI Meetings
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that all required members participated in its Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA)/Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings, as evidenced by the absence of the Medical Director from five of five QAPI meetings reviewed. A review of the facility’s QAPI policy, revised 12/31/18, stated that the facility maintains a written QAPI plan and that all departments are involved in quality improvement efforts. However, the Quality Assurance meeting sign-in sheets for 6/30/25, 10/14/25, 1/21/26, 3/7/26, and 5/21/26 showed the Medical Director was not present at any of the five meetings. During interviews on 6/11/26, the DON stated she had been employed since January 2026 and reported the Medical Director had not attended the QAPI meeting she participated in, either in person or by telephone. The Medical Director stated he had not attended a QAPI meeting in a long time, said the last one he attended was under the previous administration, and reported the facility did not inform him of the meetings or discuss the information reviewed during them. The Administrator stated the facility held QAPI meetings quarterly during the month following each quarter and said she was unaware the Medical Director was required to attend.
Failure to Monitor Food Temperatures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to its policy on monitoring food temperatures, which requires that the temperature of potentially hazardous cooked foods be checked and recorded to ensure they are not in the danger zone for more than six hours. Observations revealed that kitchen staff were serving meals without checking or recording food temperatures for the past 30 days. A review of the meal temperature logbook confirmed the absence of documentation for breakfast, lunch, or dinner since a month prior to the observation. Interviews with the Dietary Manager and staff revealed that the lack of a logbook and a functioning thermometer contributed to the failure to monitor food temperatures. The Dietary Manager admitted to not considering alternative methods for logging temperatures and confirmed that the thermometer was not working and replacements had not yet arrived. The Administrator was unaware of the situation and emphasized the importance of checking food temperatures to prevent burns and reduce the risk of foodborne illness.
Failure to Administer Two-Step TB Skin Test
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to establish and maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by the lack of administration of a second-step tuberculin (TB) skin test for one resident and 34 employees. The facility's policy required a two-step Mantoux TB skin test for residents and employees without documentation of a negative TB skin test within the last 12 months. However, Resident #104, who was admitted with a diagnosis of Essential Hypertension, only received the first step of the TB skin test, with no documentation of the second step being administered. This oversight was confirmed by the Director of Nursing (DON) during an interview. Additionally, a review of the facility's TB Skin Test Placement documentation revealed that 34 out of 37 employees lacked documentation of a second-step TB skin test or proof of a negative TB skin test within the last 12 months prior to hire. The Business Office Manager, responsible for coordinating TB skin tests for new employees, admitted to being unaware of the requirement for a two-step TB skin test. Interviews with the Administrator (ADM) and DON revealed a lack of awareness regarding the necessity of a two-step TB skin test for both staff and residents, indicating a systemic issue in the facility's infection control practices.
Failure to Conceal Urinary Catheter Bag
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the dignity of a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter by not concealing the urine collection bag. Observations on October 1, 2024, revealed that the catheter bag of Resident #51 was visible from the open door of their room, hanging on the side of the bed without a privacy cover. This was confirmed by RN #1, who acknowledged that the bag should have been covered to uphold the resident's dignity. The Director of Nursing also verified that the catheter bag should have been covered, noting that its exposure could cause embarrassment for the resident. Resident #51 was admitted to the facility on September 11, 2024, with a diagnosis of neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder.
Inaccurate PASARR Completion for Resident with Mental Illness
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately complete and request a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) for a resident with a history of mental illness. The Level 1 PAS for the resident, submitted on 9/30/24, incorrectly marked 'No' for questions regarding the resident's history of mental illness, use of psychotropic medications, and history of alcohol or drug abuse. However, the resident's face sheet indicated diagnoses of Schizophrenia, unspecified psychosis, alcohol use with intoxication delirium, and major depressive disorder. Additionally, physician orders showed the resident was prescribed Cymbalta, an antidepressant, which is considered a psychotropic medication. An interview with the social services staff responsible for completing the PAS revealed that she did not notice the resident's schizophrenia diagnosis and was unaware that the prescribed antidepressant was a psychotropic medication. She acknowledged the resident's history of alcohol abuse and admitted to inaccurately answering the screening questions. The administrator confirmed the expectation for PASARRs to be completed accurately to ensure residents receive any specialized services needed.
Inadequate Pressure Ulcer Care for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate care and treatment for a pressure ulcer to improve healing for a resident. The resident was admitted with a skin tear on the sacral area, which was initially thought to be non-pressure related by the Director of Nursing (DON). The wound was treated with Lantiseptic, a barrier ointment, from admission until a later date when the Medical Director (MD) assessed the wound and changed the treatment to Duoderm for debridement. The DON acknowledged that Lantiseptic was not appropriate for an open pressure wound and could cause deterioration. The documentation lacked complete measurements of the wound, which were necessary to track healing progress. The Medical Director confirmed that the initial information relayed to him was that the wound was a stage 1, leading to the Lantiseptic order. Upon his assessment, he determined the wound was not a stage 1 and changed the treatment. The Administrator was unaware of the pressure wound and was informed it was something like a bite. The facility's policy required a treatment plan developed by the wound care team, but the documentation and treatment did not align with this policy, leading to inadequate care for the resident's pressure ulcer.
Failure to Implement Stop Date for PRN Psychotropic Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident receiving a PRN psychotropic medication had a stop date, as required by their policy and CMS regulations. The policy mandates that PRN orders for psychotropic medications must be limited to 14 days, after which the attending physician must review the resident's condition to determine if continued use is necessary. However, a review of the September 2024 Medication Administration Record for Resident #108 revealed an order for Lorazepam 1 MG to be administered every 12 hours as needed for anxiety or agitation, with no stop date. The resident received doses on multiple occasions without the required stop date or physician re-evaluation. An interview with the Administrator confirmed that the Lorazepam order for Resident #108 did not have a stop date, which was a deviation from the facility's policy. The Administrator acknowledged that the medication should have had a stop date after 14 days to ensure the resident received the least amount of medication necessary to control symptoms and to allow for a physician's re-evaluation of the continued need. Resident #108 was admitted to the facility with a medical diagnosis of Hemiplegia following unspecified cerebrovascular disease affecting the right dominant side.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 1 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Rolling Fork
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cypress At Lake Providence | 18.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Yazoo City Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center | 27.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 1 |
| Martha Coker Green House Home | 28.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| West Carroll Care Center, Inc | 29.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Carroll Health And Rehab Llc | 29.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Sharkey-issaquena Nursing Home.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release October 2026) and official state health department websites.