BEDFORD CARE CENTER-WARREN HALL, LLC
PICAYUNE, MS · Pearl River County · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds
📍 2797 Cooper Road, Picayune, MS 39466 · 📞 (601) 799-1616
Medicare ID: 255343 · Last Medicare inspection: Jan 14, 2026
This facility has been cited for potential issues related to abuse. CMS places this warning on facilities where inspectors identified concerns during their survey.
CMS has identified this as a facility with a history of serious quality issues that requires enhanced oversight and more frequent inspections.
Score Breakdown
What the numbers mean
BEDFORD CARE CENTER-WARREN HALL, LLC scored 45 out of 100 — 19 points below the state average of 64.
📋 Inspections: 23 citations over the last 36 months — 9 more than the state average (14). 12 were rated serious (G+) — inspectors found actual or potential harm to residents.
👥 Staffing: Staffing is within an acceptable range but not among the highest-performing facilities. Ask about nurse coverage on evenings, nights, and weekends when you visit.
⚠️ Penalties & enforcement: CMS has recorded 1 enforcement action totaling $8,617 against this facility. Penalties are only issued after a facility fails two levels of regulatory review — meaning this is a serious escalation beyond a standard citation. Ask for a written explanation of every fine and what corrective actions were taken.
💬 Complaints: Some complaint-driven inspections have occurred. These are unannounced visits triggered by formal concerns from residents, families, or staff. Ask the facility how they handle resident grievances.
⚠️ Resident quality outcomes: Some quality measures are below national benchmarks. Areas like fall prevention, pain management, or medication use may warrant closer attention.
What inspectors found (last 3 surveys)
Top concern areas
⚖ Penalties & Enforcement
Federal civil monetary penalties (CMPs) are only issued after a facility has failed two levels of regulatory review — meaning problems were found on inspection and the facility could not rebut the findings. This is a serious escalation beyond a standard citation.
⚠ Each enforcement action required CMS to make a separate non-compliance determination — meaning this facility failed two levels of regulatory review before any fine was issued. Ask management specifically what violations triggered these fines and what corrective steps were taken.
📅 Per-action enforcement records (date, fine amount, and penalty type for each individual action) are sourced from a separate CMS enforcement dataset and will be added in a future data update.
Resident Wellbeing — Key Indicators
These are the measures families ask about most. They come from CMS clinical assessments of every resident — not just inspection reports. Stars (★) count toward the official CMS quality star rating.
Source: CMS MDS Quality Measures & Medicare claims data. Scores shown are the most recent 4-quarter averages for long-stay residents.
Track this facility with free email alerts
Get notified when new inspections, citations, score changes, or enforcement actions are published for this facility.
What this facility's data shows
▶ Score breakdown — the numbers behind this assessment
Each pillar scores 0–100 and is combined into the overall score. A strong overall can mask a weak pillar — compare all four and see how they stack against the state average in Section B.
🏗 How This Facility Compares to MS State Averages
Comparing a facility to others in the same state puts its score in context. A facility might have 8 citations and that could be above average in one state and below in another. Green means this facility is doing better than its peers; red means it's falling short.
| Metric | This facility | MS avg | vs. State |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Overall score
The combined Senior Care Report Card score out of 100.
|
45 | 64 | ▼ Worse than state avg |
|
Inspection score
How well the facility performs on standard health surveys.
|
0 | 50 | ▼ Worse than state avg |
|
Staffing score
RN hours, total nurse hours, and staff turnover from CMS payroll data.
|
66 | 58 | ▲ Better than state avg |
|
Penalty score
Fines, payment denials, and enforcement actions on file.
|
52 | 68 | ▼ Worse than state avg |
|
Complaint score
Volume of complaint surveys and substantiated complaints.
|
65 | 93 | ▼ Worse than state avg |
|
Quality score
Resident clinical outcomes vs national benchmarks: falls, antipsychotics, pain, vaccination, hospitalizations.
|
45 | 52 | ▼ Worse than state avg |
|
Citations (3 yrs)
Total number of deficiencies cited in the last 36 months.
|
23 | 13.8 | ▼ Worse than state avg |
|
Serious citations
Citations rated severity G or higher (actual harm or immediate jeopardy).
|
12 | 1.9 | ▼ Worse than state avg |
📅 Inspection Timeline
State health inspectors visit nursing homes on a regular cycle — typically every 12 to 15 months — and document every deficiency they find. The timeline below shows the date and scale of each inspection visit over the past several years. A pattern of worsening surveys is a red flag even if the most recent visit looks clean.
Bar length proportional to citation count. Red = serious findings (severity G+). Orange = elevated. Green = low.
📄 Full Citation Record
Every time state inspectors visit a nursing home, they write up anything that doesn’t meet federal standards. Each write-up is called a citation.
Each citation shows what the problem was and how serious it was, using a color-coded badge:
A Repeat tag means the same problem appeared in a previous inspection — it was not fully corrected the first time. Citations shown cover the last two years.
How Are Residents Doing?
Inspections tell you whether a facility followed the rules. These measures tell you how residents actually fared — whether they fell, experienced pain, lost weight, or were over-medicated. CMS collects this data through regular clinical assessments that nurses complete for every resident. Unlike inspections, which happen once a year, these assessments happen continuously.
How to read these cards: Each card shows one measure. Lower percentages are better for most (e.g. fewer falls), but higher is better for vaccination rates and community return. ★ Star rating marks measures CMS uses in its official quality star rating.
Source: CMS MDS Quality Measures (2025Q1-2025Q4). Collected via standardized clinical assessments — not inspector visits.
Hospitalization & ER Visits
These numbers come directly from Medicare claims — real billing records of every time a resident was hospitalized or sent to the emergency room. They\'re among the most objective measures of care quality because they can\'t be influenced by how a facility writes up an assessment. The adjusted score is the most meaningful number — it\'s been corrected to account for how sick residents were, so a facility treating frailer patients isn\'t unfairly penalized.
What to look for: An adjusted score significantly above the expected score means this facility hospitalizes residents more often than peer facilities with similar patient populations — that gap is worth asking about directly.
Source: CMS Medicare claims data. Scores are risk-adjusted — they account for how ill residents were when admitted so facilities treating sicker populations aren\'t penalized for it.
💬 Questions to Ask Before Touring
These questions are generated specifically from this facility's score profile and citation history — not a generic checklist. A facility's willingness to answer them openly, and the quality of their answers, is itself an important signal. Bring this list when you tour or call.
- Federal inspectors found 12 citations rated as causing actual harm or immediate jeopardy in the public record. Walk us through each incident: what happened, who was affected, and what specific policy or staffing changes have been put in place since?
- What is your current RN-to-resident ratio on each shift, and what is your annual staff turnover rate among nursing staff?
- This facility has a significant CMS enforcement history. Can you identify each action in the past three years, what it was for, and what systemic — not just procedural — changes were made to prevent recurrence?
- How do you handle formal complaints from residents or families, and what is your typical time to resolution?
- Some resident outcome measures are below average here. What is your current approach to fall prevention, pain management, and quarterly medication review?
- 12 citations in the public record were rated as causing actual harm to a resident. Can you describe what occurred in each case and what specific safeguards are now in place?
- Can we speak privately with two or three current residents or their families?
👪 Family Decision Guide
This guide translates this facility's data into practical next steps for families. It is not a recommendation for or against placement — it is a structured framework for the conversations you need to have before making a decision.
✓ Positives to confirm
- No pattern of repeat violations detected
⚠ Areas to probe
- Inspection score is low — ask for the most recent state survey results
- Penalty history present — ask what enforcement actions occurred and outcomes
- Elevated complaint activity — ask how resident concerns are investigated
- Serious-harm citations on record — require a written explanation of corrective action
- Always speak with at least two current residents or family members independently
📈 Score History
The score is recalculated every time CMS releases updated data (typically monthly). A consistent downward trend is more concerning than a single low score. An improving trend after a period of poor performance may indicate management changes are taking effect. Your subscription will alert you whenever the score changes materially.
🏢 Ownership & Operators
Ownership matters because large corporate chains sometimes prioritize cost controls over care quality. CMS requires every nursing home to disclose its owners, operators, and managing employees. Frequent ownership changes can disrupt staffing and operations — which is why we flag facilities that changed ownership in the past 12 months.
| Owner / Operator | Role | Ownership % | Effective |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCELROY, MICHAEL | Individual | — | 1970-01-01 |
| JANET F MCELROY FAMILY TRUST FBO NICOLE MCELROY BEVON | Organization | — | 1970-01-01 |
| BEVON, NICOLE | Individual | — | 1970-01-01 |
| HATTIESBURG MEDICAL PARK MANAGEMENT CORP. | Organization | — | 1970-01-01 |
| MICHAEL E MCELROY FAMILY TRUST FBO NICOLE MCELROY BEVON | Organization | — | 1970-01-01 |
| MCELROY, SONYA | Individual | — | 1970-01-01 |
| BEDFORD HEALTH PROPERTIES, LLC | Organization | — | 1970-01-01 |
| JANET F. MCELROY FAMILY TRUST FBO MICHAEL E. MCELROY, JR. | Organization | — | 1970-01-01 |
| MICHAEL E. MCELROY FAMILY TRUST FBO MICHAEL E. MCELROY, JR. | Organization | — | 1970-01-01 |
| BEVON, JACK | Individual | — | 1970-01-01 |
| WORRELL, STEPHEN | Individual | — | 1970-01-01 |
🔔 Monthly tracking is now free
We check CMS data monthly. Use the tracking form above and we will email you when new citations appear, scores change, or enforcement actions are added.
This report reflects publicly available CMS data only and is updated monthly. Severity codes and narratives are reproduced directly from the CMS health inspection database. Senior Care Report Card scores are independently computed and are not affiliated with or endorsed by CMS or Medicare.gov.