Mississippi ›Mendenhall

Bedford Care Center of Mendenhall

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

925 West Mangum Avenue, Mendenhall, MS 39114 (opens Google Maps) · Simpson County · (601) 847-1311· 60 certified beds · avg 56 residents/day · certified since Nov 1, 1992 · Medicare and Medicaid certified

Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →

Part of chain: BEDFORD CARE CENTERS (7 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 6, 2025
6
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 17, 2025
$79,758
Fines, last 3 years
4.43
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · how star ratings work →

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Aug 5, 2024 · F-0656 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.

Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Sep 10, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Aug 5, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Sep 10, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 17, 2025 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.

Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jan 12, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 5, 2024 · F-0561 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time.

Why it matters: Losing everyday choices makes residents feel powerless in their own home.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Sep 10, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 13, 2023 · F-0656 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.

Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Nov 12, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 13, 2023 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Nov 12, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 25 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint F-0656

  2. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint F-0689

  3. G · Actual harm, isolated

    The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint F-0760

View all 25 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 25, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656
Jun 25, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Dec 17, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760
Feb 6, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · F-0561
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
Aug 5, 2024▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656
Aug 5, 2024▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Aug 5, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · from a complaint · F-0561
Dec 13, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656
Dec 13, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Sep 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558
Sep 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Sep 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693
Sep 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695
Sep 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Sep 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Sep 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Sep 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887
Sep 7, 2023C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565
Sep 7, 2023C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss. · F-0574
Sep 7, 2023C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732
Apr 30, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695
Apr 30, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 4).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2024
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2025
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202120E
2023132G ▲
202433K ▲
202551G ▲
202620D

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

How to file a complaint about care →

4 fines totaling $79,758, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.

DateTypeAmount / length
Dec 17, 2025Fine$40,404
Aug 5, 2024Fine$30,602
Aug 5, 2024Payment Denial11 days from Aug 30, 2024
Dec 13, 2023Fine$4,376
Dec 13, 2023Fine$4,376

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMississippi averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.43
Mississippi average: 4.88
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.65
Mississippi average: 0.74
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.04
Mississippi average: 4.09
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityMississippi avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.434.883.95bottom 40% in Mississippi; top 25% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.650.740.69bottom 50% in Mississippi; top 42% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.044.093.50top 42% in Mississippi; top 22% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.440.380.48top 21% in Mississippi; top 41% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)61.145.745.8bottom 11% in Mississippi; bottom 15% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)60.038.442.9bottom 16% in Mississippi; bottom 22% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 4.11, RN 0.61, weekend 3.75.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.11 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.

Quality measures: assessments & claims

Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.

Quality measures rating: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Bedford Care Center of Mendenhall. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Calculate a stay from a quote you receive

Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.

Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.

Before you compare prices

  • Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
  • Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
  • Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

How to read ownership records →

Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Bedford Health Properties, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%11/01/2001
Bevon, NicoleIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest25%11/01/2001
Janet F McElroy Family Trust Fbo Nicole McElroy BevonOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/27/2025
McElroy, MichaelIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest25%11/01/2001
Michael E. McElroy Family Trust Fbo Michael E. McElroy, Jr.Organization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest13%04/25/2025
Bean, LisaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/28/2008
Bean, LisaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/28/2008
Bevon, CharlesIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2005
Bevon, CharlesIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2005
Bevon, JackIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE01/21/2021
Bevon, JackIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/21/2021
Bevon, NicoleIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2001
Blackledge, RichardIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/04/2016
Blackledge, RichardIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/09/2016
Forvis Mazars LLPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/31/2016
Gibson, RhondaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/29/1996
Gibson, RhondaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/29/1996
Gilbert, HeatherIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2024
Gilbert, HeatherIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2024
Hattiesburg Medical Park Management Corp.OrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2001

Showing 20 of 34 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 14 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Bedford Care Centers — 7 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
  • "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
  • "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 61% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 34 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Hillcrest Nursing Center10.5 miMagee, MS★★★★☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 1 closest →

All facilities in Mendenhall →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 255150.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details