Delta South Nursing & Rehabilitation

Name: Delta South Nursing & Rehabilitation
Address: 640 COLONEL GEORGE E DAY PARKWAY, Sikeston, MO, 63801, US
Telephone: 5734713400

640 Colonel George E Day Parkway, Sikeston, MO 63801 · New Madrid County · 60 certified beds · avg 52 residents/day · certified since Aug 16, 2017

4/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

3.89

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

All citations in the current public record (24)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Jan 9, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Jan 9, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require.
Jan 9, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable.
Jan 9, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Jan 9, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition.
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits.
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time.
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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. · from a complaint
Aug 31, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Aug 31, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Aug 31, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Aug 31, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way.
Aug 31, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Aug 31, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Aug 31, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care.
Aug 31, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Aug 31, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Aug 31, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 5).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2023	10	E
2024	9	D
2026	5	D

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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

Measure	This facility	Missouri avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	3.89	3.66	3.95	top 37% in Missouri; top 44% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.53	0.49	0.69	top 33% in Missouri; bottom 42% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.49	3.22	3.50	top 35% in Missouri; top 43% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.42	0.33	0.48	top 17% in Missouri; top 44% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	49.0	56.0	45.8	top 31% in Missouri; bottom 39% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	25.0	47.8	42.9	top 19% in Missouri; top 20% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.17, RN 0.43, weekend 2.84. Staffing rating: 3/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Young, Bobbie	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	03/01/2017

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
"How do you make sure resident assessments are completed and submitted to the state on time?"
"What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
"What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
"How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
"How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
"Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
"How do you track that every resident's quarterly assessment happens on time?"
"What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
"Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection
Annie's Garden Skilled Nursing	1.4 mi	Sikeston, MO		—/5
Sikeston Convalescent Center	1.7 mi	Sikeston, MO	★★★☆☆	4/5
Hunter Acres Caring Center	2.2 mi	Sikeston, MO	★★★☆☆	4/5
Clearview Nursing Center	2.5 mi	Sikeston, MO	★★★★☆	4/5
Bertrand Nursing and Rehab Center	6.6 mi	Bertrand, MO	★★★★☆	5/5
Cotton Point Living Center	7.4 mi	Matthews, MO	★★★☆☆	4/5
Daybreak Nursing Center	9.9 mi	Sikeston, MO	★★★★☆	5/5
Aspire Senior Living East Prairie	11.2 mi	East Prairie, MO	★★★☆☆	4/5
New Madrid Living Center	18.7 mi	New Madrid, MO	★★★★★	5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Sikeston →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265862.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Delta South Nursing & Rehabilitation

640 Colonel George E Day Parkway, Sikeston, MO 63801 · 5734713400

Health inspection rating 4/5 · CMS overall 4/5· Fines (3y): $0

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
☐ "How do you make sure resident assessments are completed and submitted to the state on time?"
☐ "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
☐ "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
☐ "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
☐ "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
☐ "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
☐ "How do you track that every resident's quarterly assessment happens on time?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

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 265862 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)