Hearth Record

Legacy Hospice of the South (* Deemed )

A hospice in Corinth, Mississippi 38834

301 E Waldron Street, Corinth, Mississippi 38834. (662) 286-5333.

CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.

The short answer

Record last released by CMS on Oct 23, 2026.

The last 24 months 20 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited May 2024. Most serious: Condition-level. Every month

Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.

What these words mean3
Inspection (survey)
A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
Deficiency, citation, violation
What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.
Condition-level deficiency
For hospices, home health agencies, hospitals and dialysis facilities, CMS writes deficiencies at two levels. Standard is the usual one; condition-level is the more serious, when a problem is serious enough that the provider doesn’t meet a whole condition of taking part in Medicare. Source: CMS, State Operations Manual.

What did inspectors find?

20 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 12 hospices serving ZIP code 38834 had 1.

The last inspection on record was on May 23, 2024: an initial follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care.

1 deficiency at condition level, the more serious of CMS’s two levels

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

When those deficiencies happened

20 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited May 2024. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

20 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 NovDec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOct

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.

Each deficiency, as cited

Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

May 23, 2024: initial follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care2 deficiencies
  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c))

    The inspectors’ words, 111 words

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 5 (Patient #5) did not have evidence in the patient record that the hospice has developed an individualized written plan of care for each patient. The plan of care must reflect patient/family goals and interventions based on the problems identified in the initial, comprehensive, and updated comprehensive assessments. The plan of care must include all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions. Patient 5: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient issue with dysphagia. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to dysphagia included in the plan of care. Corrected during survey.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(5))

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 5 (Patient #5) did not have evidence the plan of care must include all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions, including equipment and supply needs. Patient 5: The medical record contained nursing documentation on 05/17/2024 identifying patient use of a rollator. There was no evidence of orders for the equipment included in the plan of care. Corrected during survey.”

    Rule L0550. Standard-level.

Apr 4, 2024: initial inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care18 deficiencies
  • IDG, care planning, coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56)

    “Condition of Participation: Interdisciplinary Group, Care Planning, and Coordination of Services. L536”

    Rule L0536. Condition-level.

  • Notice of rights and responsibilities (42 CFR 418.52(a)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 97 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #7,#9) did not have evidence that the hospice informed and provided written information to the patient concerning its policies on advance directives, including a description of applicable state law. Patient 7: The medical record contained evidence the hospice provided information on advance directives signed by a paid caregiver with no documentation giving legal authority to sign on the patient’s behalf. The profile did contain contact information for a son. Patient 9: The medical record contained evidence the hospice provided information on advance directives signed 11/23/23 for patient admitted 11/22/23.”

    Rule L0503. Standard-level.

  • Notice of rights and responsibilities (42 CFR 418.52(a)(3))

    The inspectors’ words, 94 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #7,#9) did not have evidence that the hospice obtained the patient’s or representative’s signature confirming that they received a copy of the Patient’s Rights and Responsibilities. Patient 7: The medical record contained consent identifying receipt of Patient Rights and Responsibilities signed by a paid caregiver with no documentation giving legal authority to sign on the patient’s behalf. The profile did contain contact information for a son. Patient 9: The medical record contained consent identifying receipt of Patient Rights and Responsibilities signed 11/23/23 for patient admitted 11/22/23.”

    Rule L0504. Standard-level.

  • Exercise of rights/respect for proprty/person (42 CFR 418.52(b)(3))

    The inspectors’ words, 111 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #7,#9) did not have evidence that if a state court has not adjudged a patient incompetent, any legal representative designated by the patient in accordance with state law may exercise the patient’s rights to the extent allowed by state law. Patient 7: The medical record contained an election and consents signed by a person defined as a paid caregiver. There was no evidence the representative had legal authority to sign on the patient’s behalf and a son was also listed as a contact in the profile. Patient 9: The medical record contained admission consents signed by the spouse 11/23/23 for patient admitted 11/22/23.”

    Rule L0507. Standard-level.

  • Rights of the patient (42 CFR 418.52(c)(4))

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #7,#9) did not have evidence that the patient chooses a health care provider, including an attending physician. Patient 7: The medical record contained evidence a paid caregiver chose an attending physician. The profile did contain contact information for a son. Patient 9: The medical record contained evidence the patient/representative chose an attending physician 11/23/23 for patient admitted 11/22/23.”

    Rule L0515. Standard-level.

  • Rights of the patient (42 CFR 418.52(c)(5))

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #7,#9) did not have evidence of the appropriate documentation for release of confidential information. Patient 7: The medical record contained evidence the hospice obtained release of confidential information signed by a paid caregiver with no documentation giving legal authority to sign on the patient’s behalf. The profile did contain contact information for a son. Patient 9: The medical record contained evidence the hospice obtained release of confidential information signed 11/23/23 for patient admitted 11/22/23.”

    Rule L0516. Standard-level.

  • Rights of the patient (42 CFR 418.52(c)(7))

    The inspectors’ words, 96 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #7,#9) did not have evidence that the patient received information about the services covered under the hospice benefit. Patient 7: The medical record contained consent identifying receipt of information about the services covered under the hospice benefit signed by a paid caregiver with no documentation giving legal authority to sign on the patient’s behalf. The profile did contain contact information for a son. Patient 9: The medical record contained consent identifying receipt of information about the services covered under the hospice benefit signed 11/23/23 for patient admitted 11/22/23.”

    Rule L0518. Standard-level.

  • Rights of the patient (42 CFR 418.52(c)(8))

    The inspectors’ words, 98 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #7,#9) did not have evidence that the patient received information about the scope of services that the hospice will provide and specific limitations on those services. Patient 7: The medical record contained consent identifying receipt of information about the scope of services signed by a paid caregiver with no documentation giving legal authority to sign on the patient’s behalf. The profile did contain contact information for a son. Patient 9: The medical record contained consent identifying receipt of information about the scope of services signed 11/23/23 for patient admitted 11/22/23.”

    Rule L0519. Standard-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(6))

    The inspectors’ words, 216 words

    “Upon patient record review, 8 of 19 (Patients #3,#4,#7,#9,#10,#12,#13,#14) did not have evidence in the patient record that a review was completed of all prescription and non-prescription medications. Patient 3: The medication profile contained MiraLax oral powder with no instructions for a diluent. Corrected on site. Patient 4: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence oxygen on the medication profile. Corrected on site. Patient 7: During observation of home visit and medication reconciliation, the medication profile contained a discontinued Buspar. Corrected on site. Patient 9: The medication profile contained nystatin and triamcinolone topical medications with no area defined for administration. Corrected on site. Patient 10: The medication profile contained insulin with instructions per sliding scale. There was no evidence of dose defined per blood glucose readings. The medication profile also contained 2 listings of Zithromax dated 12/12/23 and 3/10/24 that were active in the profile. Corrected on site. Patient 12: The medication profile contained diclofenac topical medication with no area defined for administration. Corrected on site. Patient 13: The medication profile contained nitroglycerin with no instructions for frequency limitations. Instructions states as needed and did not define max dose. Corrected on site. Patient 14: The medication profile contained oxygen with no delivery method. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0530. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c))

    The inspectors’ words, 443 words

    “Upon patient record review, 9 of 19 (Patients #4,#6,#7,#9,#10,#11,#12,#13,#14) did not have evidence in the patient record that the hospice has developed an individualized written plan of care for each patient. The plan of care must reflect patient/family goals and interventions based on the problems identified in the initial, comprehensive, and updated comprehensive assessments. The plan of care must include all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions. Patient 4: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient issues with dyspnea, high fall risk, and use of an external condom catheter for urination. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to respiratory and genitourinary dysfunction and fall safety included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 6: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient issue with dyspnea. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to respiratory dysfunction included included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 7: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient issue with dysphagia. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to dysphagia included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 9: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient issue with dysphagia. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to dysphagia included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 10: The medication profile identified the patient was administered insulin per sliding scale instructions based on blood glucose readings at meals. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to endocrine dysfunction included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 11: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient issue with dyspnea. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to respiratory dysfunction included included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 12: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient issue with dysphagia. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to dysphagia included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 13: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient issue with dyspnea. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to respiratory dysfunction included included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 14: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient issues with dyspnea, high fall risk, and cardiac symptoms. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to respiratory and cardiac dysfunction, and fall safety included in the plan of care. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(4))

    The inspectors’ words, 209 words

    “Upon patient record review, 7 of 19 (Patients #3,#4,#9,#10,#12,#13,#14) did not have evidence the plan of care must include all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions, including medications and treatments. Patient 3: The medical record contained an order for MiraLax oral powder with no instructions for a diluent. Corrected on site. Patient 4: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence of an order for oxygen dose, frequency, and delivery method. Corrected on site. Patient 9: The plan of care contained orders for nystatin and triamcinolone topical medications with no area defined for administration. Corrected on site. Patient 10: The medical record contained an order for insulin with instructions per sliding scale. There was no evidence of dose defined per blood glucose readings. Corrected on site. Patient 12: The medical record contained an order for diclofenac topical medication with no area defined for administration. Corrected on site. Patient 13: The medical record contained an order nitroglycerin with no instructions for frequency limitations. Instructions states as needed and did not define max dose. Corrected on site. Patient 14: The medical record contained an order for oxygen with no delivery method. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0549. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(5))

    The inspectors’ words, 399 words

    “Upon patient record review, 10 of 19 (Patients #3,#4,#5,#6,#7,#8,#10,#11,#12,#13) did not have evidence the plan of care must include all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions, including equipment and supply needs. Patient 3: The medical record contained nursing documentation 1/12/24 identifying patient use of a Hoyer lift for transfers. There was no evidence of an order for the equipment included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 4: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence of an order for the equipment and supplies included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 5: The medical record contained an order for oxygen equipment and supplies in error. The agency confirmed the patient did not have an order for oxygen or equipment in the home. Corrected on site. Patient 6: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of a cane and nebulizer, and IV equipment 3/29/24. There was no evidence of orders for the equipment included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 7: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of bedrails. There was no evidence of an order for the equipment included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 8: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of a hospital bed, rails, and commode. There was no evidence of orders for the equipment included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 10: The medical record contained an order for oxygen administration. There was no evidence of an order for the equipment and supplies included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 11: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of a walker and wheelchair. There was no evidence of orders for the equipment included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 12: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of a walker and commode. There was no evidence of orders for the equipment included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 13: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen, walker, and trapeze. There was no evidence of orders for the equipment included in the plan of care. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0550. Standard-level.

  • Program activities (42 CFR 418.58(c)(2))

    “Upon observation, there was no evidence the hospice investigates all adverse events, incidents, accidents, variances or unusual occurrences that involve patient care and develops a plan of correction to prevent the same or similar event from occurring again. Patient 1: The medical record contained nursing documentation 2/14/24 identifying patient fall. There was no evidence of an investigation of the incident. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0569. Standard-level.

  • Hospice aide assignments and duties (42 CFR 418.76(g)(1))

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 19 (Patient #7) did not have evidence in the patient record that hospice aide assignments and duties are specific to the patient care needs. Patient 7: The aide care plan did not contain transfer instructions for assistance needs. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0625. Standard-level.

  • Hospice aide assignments and duties (42 CFR 418.76(g)(2))

    “Upon patient record review 1 of 19 (Patient #7) did not have evidence documentation in the patient record that a hospice aide provides services that are: • Ordered by the interdisciplinary group • Included in the plan of care Patient 7: There was no evidence the aide completed the assigned tasks during visits completed 3/19/24, 3/26/24, and 3/28/24.”

    Rule L0626. Standard-level.

  • Recertification of the terminal illness (42 CFR 418.102(c))

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 19 (Patient #7) did not have evidence that before the recertification period for each patient, the medical director or physician designee must review the patient’s clinical information and provide written documentation that it is anticipated that the patient’s life expectancy is 6 months or less. Patient 7: The medical record contained CTI for benefit period 6 with improper entry of face to face completion 10/6/23. The face to face was completed 10/3/23.”

    Rule L0668. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 104 words

    “Upon patient client record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #7,#9) did not have evidence that each patient record contains: • Signed copies of the notice of patient rights in accordance with 418.52 • Signed election statement in accordance with 418.24 Patient 7: The medical record contained an election form and consent for receipt of Patient Rights signed by a paid caregiver with no documentation giving legal authority to sign on the patient’s behalf. The profile did contain contact information for a son. Patient 9: The medical record contained an election form and consent for receipt of Patient Rights signed 11/23/23 for patient admitted 11/22/23.”

    Rule L0673. Standard-level.

  • Authentication (42 CFR 418.104(b))

    The inspectors’ words, 93 words

    “Upon patient client record review, 1 of 19 (Patient #8) did not have evidence that all entries are legible, clear, complete, and appropriately authenticated and dated in accordance with the organizations policies and procedures and currently accepted standards of practice. Electronic signatures are acceptable as long the hospice is following appropriate safeguards to prevent unauthorized access to the patient records. Patient 8: The medical record contained a missed visit coordination note 3/12/24 with no information in the template to explain reason for frequency not met. The provided template in the note was empty.”

    Rule L0679. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
May 23, 2024Initial follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care2 deficiencies cited
Apr 4, 2024Initial inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care18 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Feb 15, 1999.
  • Ownership: for-profit.
  • Cited at in the last three years: it didn’t meet a whole condition of Medicare’s rules.
Source:

CMS, Hospice General Information. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Has anything been proven against it?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • 0 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who does the caring?

  • From Medicare claims (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024): 12.3 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 4.5% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 92.2% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 80% at home, 6% in assisted living, 12% in a nursing facility, 1% in a skilled nursing facility, 1% in a hospital.
Source:

CMS, Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day12.3 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends4.5%
Visits near death92.2% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • Legacy Operating Company LLC owns 100% directly since Dec 3, 2019.
  • 10 owners or officers are people: James G Corbin (corporate director); James G Corbin (managing employee (on the payroll)); James G Corbin (runs it (operational or managerial control)); Cameron Huxford (managing employee (under contract)); Carol Ziegler (corporate officer); Carol Ziegler (managing employee (on the payroll)); Carol Ziegler (runs it (operational or managerial control)); Andrew P Lofaso (managing employee (on the payroll)); Andrew P Lofaso (runs it (operational or managerial control)); Kelli Jaco (managing employee (on the payroll)).
  • A private-equity firm is among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospice All Owners and Hospice Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Bcdi Legacy Holdings, LPOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Nov 10, 2025
LH Holding Company LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Dec 3, 2019
Bcdi Legacy Midco, LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Nov 10, 2025
Bcdi Legacy Topco, LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Nov 10, 2025
Legacy Operating Company LLCOwns 5% or more directly100%Dec 3, 2019
Bcdi Legacy Investor, LPOwns 5% or more through other companies96.71%Nov 10, 2025
BAIN Capital Double Impact Fund III, L.P.Owns 5% or more through other companies76.82%Nov 10, 2025
Bcip Double Impact II, LPOwns 5% or more through other companies6.27%Nov 10, 2025

What do families say?

  • CMS gives no family caregiver survey rating: “The number of cases is too small to report Star Ratings.”
  • In CMS’s survey of family caregivers (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 84% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 80% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 10 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 100% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 72.6% had visits from a nurse or social worker on at least 2 of their last 3 days (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
Source:

CMS, CAHPS Hospice Survey and Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Family caregiver survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of patients’ family caregivers, 1 to 5Not rated
Hospice Care IndexCMS’s Hospice Care Index, 0 to 10 (higher is better): a point for each of ten measures from Medicare claims on which the hospice meets CMS’s threshold10 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 12 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 38834, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 1; this one had 20.
Source:

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • CMS ended its Special Focus Program for hospices with serious problems on Feb 14, 2025, so no hospice is marked as one.
  • Hospice quality measures have a gap from October 2025: CMS replaced its patient assessment then, and public results from the new one (HOPE) are expected around November 2027.

Sources

If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Oct 27, 2026.

From the hospice

The public record above comes first. Anything the hospice adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospice will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.

Paid listing

None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the hospice”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 28, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.