Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
The next survey window likely opens around October 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Memphis Convalescent Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to comply with food service safety standards, as observed in their kitchen operations. Freezer and refrigerator items were not properly labeled or dated, and expired pantry items were not removed. Staff interviews revealed inconsistent responsibility for food labeling and disposal, posing a risk of food-borne illness to residents. Facility policies and FDA guidelines for food labeling were not followed.
Three residents were inaccurately coded as receiving anticoagulant medication on their MDS assessments, despite only being prescribed aspirin. This error stemmed from a misunderstanding by the MDS LVN, who incorrectly believed aspirin should be coded as an anticoagulant. The DON acknowledged that such inaccuracies could negatively impact resident care, as care plans are based on MDS assessments.
The facility failed to provide a comprehensive activities program that met residents' needs and preferences. Observations showed that scheduled activities were not conducted, and residents did not receive individual activity calendars. Interviews revealed dissatisfaction with the repetitive and boring activities, lack of weekend programming, and absence of the Activity Director (AD) during weekends. The AD acknowledged leaving early without conducting a scheduled activity, leading to resident complaints. Facility policies emphasized supporting resident choice and providing engaging activities, which were not fulfilled.
The facility failed to notify the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman about a resident's discharge to home. The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, was discharged after demanding to go home. Both the DON and ADM admitted they did not notify the Ombudsman, with the DON unaware of the requirement and the ADM believing it was unnecessary. The facility's discharge policy did not include the requirement to contact the Ombudsman.
Deficiencies in Food Storage and Labeling Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to professional standards for food service safety, as observed in their kitchen operations. Specifically, the facility did not ensure that freezer items were properly stored, labeled, and dated, with items such as a bag of chicken breasts and a frozen ham lacking labels or dates. Similarly, the refrigerator contained several items, including cucumbers, cantaloupe, sour cream, bread loaves, cream cheese, bell pepper, limes, and a pitcher of red liquid, all without proper labeling or dating. Additionally, the pantry contained expired items such as lemon juice, taco shells, mini marshmallows, and brown gravy mix, along with a dented can of tropical fruit salad, which were not removed from circulation. Interviews with staff members revealed a lack of consistent responsibility for labeling, dating, and disposing of expired food. Staff members acknowledged the potential negative outcomes of serving expired or improperly stored food, including the risk of food-borne illness to residents. The facility's policies, dated 2012, outlined the requirements for food storage, labeling, and handling of dented cans, but these were not followed, as evidenced by the observations and staff interviews. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Food Code also mandates proper labeling of food, which was not adhered to in this case.
Inaccurate MDS Coding for Anticoagulant Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate assessments for three residents, specifically in the coding of anticoagulant medication on their Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments. Resident #4, a female with dementia, chronic atrial fibrillation, and high blood pressure, was inaccurately coded as receiving anticoagulant medication, despite no active or discontinued orders for such medication. Instead, she was prescribed aspirin, which should not be coded as an anticoagulant according to the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) guidelines. Similarly, Resident #11, a female with cerebral infarction, high blood pressure, and dementia, was also inaccurately coded as receiving anticoagulant medication. Her records showed an order for aspirin, but no anticoagulant medication was prescribed. Resident #22, with high blood pressure, peripheral vascular disease, and colon cancer, was similarly misrepresented in her MDS assessment. Her records indicated an order for aspirin, but no anticoagulant medication was present. Interviews with facility staff revealed a misunderstanding in coding practices. The MDS Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) responsible for completing the assessments believed aspirin should be coded as an anticoagulant, based on incorrect information from an unspecified source. This misunderstanding was clarified during the survey, as the RAI manual explicitly states that aspirin should not be coded as an anticoagulant. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged that inaccurate MDS assessments could negatively impact resident care, as care plans are based on these assessments.
Deficiency in Resident Activities Program
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide an ongoing program of activities that met the needs and preferences of residents, as observed over three days in August 2024. The activities calendar for the month showed repetitive scheduling, with the same activities planned each week, and a lack of variety in the offerings. Observations revealed that scheduled activities, such as chronicle/devotions and dominoes, were not conducted as planned. Additionally, residents did not receive individual activity calendars in their rooms, and they had to rely on a single calendar posted outside the dining room. Interviews with residents indicated dissatisfaction with the activities program, noting that activities were not conducted on weekends and that the Activity Director (AD) was not present to facilitate them. Residents expressed that they found the activities boring and repetitive, and their suggestions for new games were not implemented. The AD confirmed that she did not work on weekends and was unsure who was responsible for running activities during that time. The AD also acknowledged that she had left early on a Friday without conducting the scheduled activity, which led to a resident complaint. The facility's grievance log and resident council minutes further highlighted issues with the activities program, with several complaints about the lack of engaging activities and the absence of weekend programming. The AD, who had recently received her certification, was aware of the residents' complaints but had not yet implemented changes. The facility's policies on resident rights and activity programming emphasized the importance of supporting resident choice and providing activities that meet their interests and needs, which were not being fulfilled as per the observations and interviews conducted.
Failure to Notify Ombudsman of Resident Discharge
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to send a copy of the discharge notice to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for a resident who was discharged to home. The resident, a male with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses including dementia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar type, was readmitted to the facility from a behavioral hospital after assaulting another resident. The facility staff had informed the resident's family member that they would not be able to keep the resident if another incident occurred, and the family member agreed to take him home if that happened. On the day of discharge, the resident returned from a 72-hour pass with his family member, was angry, and demanded to go home. The DON and ADM had a meeting with the resident and his family member, who agreed to discharge him and take him home. During interviews, both the DON and ADM admitted that they did not notify the Ombudsman about the discharge. The DON stated she was unaware of the requirement to notify the Ombudsman, while the ADM believed it was unnecessary because the discharge was not against the resident's will. The facility's discharge planning policy did not mention the requirement to contact the State Ombudsman's office. This oversight could potentially deprive residents of their rights to advocacy services, discharge/transfer options, and appeal processes.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 13 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Memphis
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wellington Care Center | 20.2 mi | — | 8 | 0 |
| Clarendon Nursing Home | 23.6 mi | — | 5 | 0 |
| Avir At Childress | 28.6 mi | — | 3 | 0 |
| Mclean Care Center | 34.7 mi | — | 1 | 1 |
| Colonial Manor Ii | 36 mi | — | 2 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Memphis Convalescent Center.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.