314 Enochs St, Tylertown, MS 39667 (opens Google Maps) · Walthall County · (601) 876-2173· 60 certified beds · avg 44 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1997 · 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 →
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 9, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 9, 2026
$14,020
Fines, last 3 years
5.87
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
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, isolated · Jan 29, 2026 · 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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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.
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.
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: May 12, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 8 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. F-0697
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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
J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 complaintF-0689
View all 8 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.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
Apr 9, 2026
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Apr 9, 2026
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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
Jan 29, 2026
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Mar 6, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately. · F-0576
Mar 6, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · F-0585
Mar 6, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623
Mar 6, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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
Nov 16, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · F-0849
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 2).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
1
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2025
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2026
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
2
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
1
0
D
2025
4
0
D
2026
3
2
J ▲
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.
1 fine totaling $14,020, 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.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Apr 9, 2026
Payment Denial
8 days from May 5, 2026
Jan 29, 2026
Fine
$14,020
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
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:
5.87
Mississippi average:
4.88
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.52
Mississippi average:
0.74
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
4.61
Mississippi average:
4.09
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Mississippi avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
5.87
4.88
3.95
top 13% in Mississippi; top 5% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.52
0.74
0.69
bottom 28% in Mississippi; bottom 41% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
4.61
4.09
3.50
top 19% in Mississippi; top 11% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.20
0.38
0.48
bottom 15% in Mississippi; bottom 13% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
41.8
45.7
45.8
top 40% in Mississippi; top 41% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
33.3
38.4
42.9
top 39% in Mississippi; top 33% 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 4.67, RN 0.41, weekend 3.66.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.67 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Billdora Senior Care. 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.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 255243.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
The Care File
Visit checklist — Billdora Senior Care
314 Enochs St, Tylertown, MS 39667 · (601) 876-2173
Health inspection rating 3/5 · CMS overall 3/5· Fines (3y): $14,020
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Jan 29, 2026 (F-0689, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Apr 9, 2026 (F-0697, Actual harm, isolated): The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "How can my family member make private phone or video calls, and can we see where?"
☐ "Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
☐ "If you ever planned to discharge or transfer my family member, how much written notice would we receive and how could we appeal?"
☐ "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
☐ "How do you coordinate hospice care, and can residents stay here while receiving it?"
☐ "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 42% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 255243 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)