How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
613 East Lee Street, Sardis, MS 38666 (opens Google Maps) · Panola County · (662) 487-2720· 60 certified beds · avg 53 residents/day · certified since Oct 14, 2001 · 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 →
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
Part of chain: THE BEEBE FAMILY (48 facilities, chain avg rating 2.8★)
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 23, 2025 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
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 15, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 23, 2025 · F-0610 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do.
Why it matters: When allegations aren't investigated, harm to residents can continue unchecked.
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 15, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 20 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint F-0686
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint F-0600
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 19, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 19, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Dec 23, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Dec 23, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610 |
| Jul 1, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0656 |
| Jul 1, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0677 |
| Jul 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Jul 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jul 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| Jul 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Jul 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jul 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0640 |
| Jul 23, 2024 | 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. · F-0656 |
| Jul 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0677 |
| Jul 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · F-0699 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 7).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 5 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 4 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 9 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 2 | 0 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 4.45 | 4.88 | 3.95 | bottom 41% in Mississippi; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.58 | 0.74 | 0.69 | bottom 38% in Mississippi; bottom 50% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.08 | 4.09 | 3.50 | top 40% in Mississippi; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.22 | 0.38 | 0.48 | bottom 24% in Mississippi; bottom 16% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 44.4 | 45.7 | 45.8 | top 50% in Mississippi; top 49% 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 3.71, RN 0.49, weekend 3.39.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.71 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Sardis Community NH. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elton G Beebe Sr Irrv Grndchildrens Tr | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2010 |
| Elton G. Beebe Sr Irrv Childrens Tr | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 85% | 01/01/2010 |
| Health Care Services, INC. | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2010 |
| Pathway Management INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2014 |
| Account Management Services INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Account Management Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Administrative Systems INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Administrative Systems INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Beebe, Bobby | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Beebe, Bobby | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Beebe, Elton | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1993 |
| Elton G. Beebe Sr Irrv Childrens Tr | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Health Care Services, INC. | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Health Care Services, INC. | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Linda Maynor | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| Linder, Edwin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Linder, Edwin | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| May, Amanda | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/21/2022 |
| May, Amanda | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/21/2022 |
| Nutrition Systems Consulting INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/31/2008 |
Showing 20 of 36 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 16 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain The Beebe Family — 48 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. Showing 8 of the 47 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diversicare of Batesville | 9.1 mi | Batesville, MS | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Senatobia Healthcare & Rehab | 13.5 mi | Senatobia, MS | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 255279.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details