Hearth Record

Gentiva

A hospice in Oxford, Mississippi 38655

2706 West Oxford Loop, Suite 100 (Oxford), Oxford, Mississippi 38655. (662) 578-4072.

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. We couldn’t read Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ list since Oct 27, 2026: qcor.cms.gov now refuses our reader. This record is as of then.

The last 24 months 16 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited May 2025. Most serious: Standard-level. Every month

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

What these words mean3
Star ratings
CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
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.

What did inspectors find?

16 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 19 hospices serving ZIP code 38655 had 0.5.

The last inspection on record was on May 7, 2025: a reaccreditation inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care.

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

16 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited May 2025. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

16 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 7, 2025: reaccreditation inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care16 deficiencies
  • Timeframe for completion of assessment (42 CFR 418.54(b))

    “Upon patient record review 1 of 19 (Patient #4) did not have evidence in the patient record that the hospice interdisciplinary group, in consultation with the individual’s attending physician (if any), completed the comprehensive assessment no later than 5 calendar days after the election of hospice care. Patient 4: The initial spiritual assessment was completed 10/10/24 with start of care 9/30/24.”

    Rule L0523. Standard-level.

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

    “Upon patient record review 1 of 19 (Patient #3) did not have evidence in the patient record that the comprehensive assessment identifies the physical, psychosocial, emotional, and spiritual needs related to the terminal illness that must be addressed in order to promote the hospice patient’s well-being, comfort, and dignity throughout the dying process. Patient 3: There was no evidence of a comprehensive spiritual assessment.”

    Rule L0524. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 258 words

    “Upon patient record review, 6 of 19 (Patients #1,#6,#7,#10,#11,#14) did not have evidence in the patient record that a review was completed of all prescription and non-prescription medications. Patient 1: Upon medication reconciliation during home visit, the facility and hospice medication profiles did not match. The facility profile contained tamsulosin and tramadol that was not on the hospice profile. Patient 6: The medical record contained nursing documentation 3/17/25 identifying oxygen was delivered. There was no evidence of oxygen listed on the medication profile. Corrected on site. Patient 7: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence of oxygen listed on the medication profile. The medication profile also contained latanoprost eye drops with no instruction of which eye or eyes identified for administration. Corrected on site. Patient 10: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence of oxygen listed on the medication profile. Upon medication reconciliation during home visit, the facility and hospice medication profiles did not match. The facility profile did not contain lorazepam, melatonin, and morphine that was on the hospice profile. Corrected on site. Patient 11: Upon medication reconciliation during home visit, the facility and hospice medication profiles did not match. The facility profile contained atorvastatin and valproate acid solution at bedtime that was not on the hospice profile. Patient 14: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence of oxygen listed on the medication profile. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0530. Standard-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(7))

    The inspectors’ words, 92 words

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 19 (Patient #3) did not have evidence in the patient record that the comprehensive assessment includes a bereavement component which includes the needs of the patient’s family and other individuals focusing on the social, spiritual, and cultural factors that may impact their ability to cope with the patient’s death. Information gathered from the initial bereavement assessment is incorporated into the plan of care and is considered in the bereavement plan of care. Patient 3: The initial bereavement assessment was completed 3/19/25 with start of care 3/13/25.”

    Rule L0531. Standard-level.

  • Update of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 119 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #2,#3) did not have evidence in the patient record that the comprehensive assessment is updated including and by: • The hospice interdisciplinary group (in collaboration with the individual’s attending physician, if any) • Changes that have taken place since the initial assessment • Information on the patient’s progress toward desired outcomes • Reassessment of the patient’s response to care • The assessment update must be accomplished as frequently as the condition of the patient requires, but no less frequently than every 15 days Patient 2: There was no evidence of an RN assessment from 3/20/25 to 4/10/25. Patient 3: There was no evidence of an RN assessment from 3/18/25 to 4/14/25.”

    Rule L0533. Standard-level.

  • Approach to service delivery (42 CFR 418.56(a)(1))

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 19 (Patient #9) did not have evidence that a Registered Nurse is designated to ensure continuous assessment of the patient and family’s needs and to coordinate activities with other members of the interdisciplinary group (IDG). The IDG must work together and is responsible for supervision of the care and service for each patient and family. Patient 9: There was no evidence of weekly wound assessments and measurements from 4/3/25-4/22/25 as required per agency policy.”

    Rule L0540. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 197 words

    “Upon patient record review, 3 of 19 (Patients #3,#10,#11) 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 3: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient unresolved issues with nausea. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to nausea included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 10: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient unresolved issues with high risk for skin impairment and dysphagia. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to skin and dysphagia included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 11: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient is a high risk for skin impairment. There was no evidence of problems, goals, and interventions related to skin 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, 298 words

    “Upon patient record review, 6 of 19 (Patients #1,#6,#7,#10,#11,#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 1: Upon medication reconciliation during home visit, the facility and hospice medication profiles did not match. Hospice did not have orders for tamsulosin and tramadol that were listed on the facility medication profile. Patient 6: The medical record contained nursing documentation 3/17/25 identifying oxygen was delivered. There was no evidence of an order for oxygen rate, frequency, and delivery method. Corrected on site. Patient 7: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence of an order for oxygen rate, frequency, and delivery method. The record also contained an order for latanoprost eye drops with no specification on which eye or eyes are appropriate for administration. Corrected on site. Patient 10: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence of an order for oxygen rate, frequency, and delivery method. Upon medication reconciliation during home visit, the facility and hospice medication profiles did not match. The facility profile did not contain lorazepam, melatonin, and morphine that was on the hospice profile. Hospice did not have orders to discontinue the medications. Corrected on site. Patient 11: Upon medication reconciliation during home visit, the facility and hospice medication profiles did not match. Hospice did not have orders for atorvastatin and valproate acid solution at bedtime that were listed on the facility medication profile. Patient 14: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence of an order for oxygen rate, frequency, and delivery method. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0549. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 300 words

    “Upon patient record review, 7 of 19 (Patients #2,#4,#7,#8,#10,#11,#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 equipment and supply needs. Patient 2: The medical record contained nursing documentation 4/1/25 identifying patient use of a wheelchair and commode. There was no evidence of orders for the DME included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 4: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of a nebulizer and walker. There was no evidence of orders for the DME included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 7: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of oxygen. There was no evidence of an order for the DME included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 8: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of a wheelchair. There was no evidence of an order for the DME included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 10: The medical record contained nursing documentation 4/15/25 and 4/22/25 identifying patient use of a Hoyer lift and hospital bed. There was no evidence of orders for the DME included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 11: The medical record contained nursing documentation identifying patient use of a hospital bed and over bed table since admission, and a Hoyer lift since 3/6/25. There was no evidence of orders for the DME included in the plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 14: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon admission identifying patient use of a wheelchair, and hospital bed. There was no evidence of orders for the DME included in the plan of care. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0550. Standard-level.

  • Review of the plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(d))

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 19 (Patient #12) did not have evidence that a revised plan of care includes information from the patient’s updated comprehensive assessment and must note the patient’s progress towards outcome/goals from the plan of care. Patient 12: The medical record contained nursing documentation upon recertification assessment 2/27/25 identifying patient’s anticoagulant use. There was no evidence the plan of care was updated to include problems, goals, and interventions related to bleeding risks. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0553. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(2))

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 19 (Patient #3) did not have evidence that the IDG ensures that the care and services are provided in accordance with the plan of care. Patient 3: The plan of care contained an order 3/17/25 for volunteers to visit 4 times monthly. There was no evidence of volunteer visits made.”

    Rule L0555. 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 4: The medical record contained nursing documentation 3/24/25 identifying a patient fall on 3/21/25. There was no evidence of incident investigation. Corrected on site. Patient 9: The medical record contained nursing documentation 4/9/25 identifying a patient fall. There was no evidence of incident investigation. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0569. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 175 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #9,#13) did not have evidence in the patient record that hospice aide assignments and duties are: • Assigned to a specific patient by a registered nurse that is a member of the interdisciplinary group • Written patient care instructions for a hospice aide must be prepared by a Registered Nurse who is responsible for the supervision of a hospice aide as specified under paragraph (h) of 418.76 • There is evidence in the patient record that the plan of care; indicate what tasks are to be done by the Aide and the frequency of these tasks. The use of “PRN” or “per patient choice”, for any task, whether personal care or non-personal care tasks, are not acceptable Patient 9: The aide care plan did not contain instructions regarding wound management during bathing. Corrected on site. Patient 13: The aide care plan contained bathing tasks for a shower twice weekly and bed bath weekly. The patient was receiving two aide visits a week per orders. 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 #10) 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 • Permitted to be performed under state law by such hospice aide • Consistent with the hospice aide training Patient 10: The medical record contained an order for aide visits three times weekly. There was no evidence of a third visit completed the week of 4/27/25.”

    Rule L0626. Standard-level.

  • Hospice plan of care (42 CFR 418.112(d))

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 19 (Patient #10) did not have evidence that a written hospice plan of care is established and maintained in consultation with SNF/NF or ICF/IID representatives. All hospice care provided is in accordance with this hospice plan of care. Patient 10: The initial POC order 4/7/25 indicated the patient accepted to receive volunteer services. There was no evidence of follow up on the request.”

    Rule L0773. Standard-level.

  • Hospice plan of care (42 CFR 418.112(d)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 110 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 19 (Patients #1,#5) did not have evidence that the hospice plan of care identifies the care and services that are needed and specifically identify which provider (nursing facility or hospice) is responsible for performing the respective functions that have been agreed upon and included in the hospice plan of care. Patient 1: The medical record contained an order 4/23/25 to obtain a UA that did not specify which provider is responsible for performing the duty. Patient 5: The initial plan of care order for foley size, change frequency, and maintenance did not specify which provider is responsible for performing the duties. Corrected on site.”

    Rule L0774. Standard-level.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
May 7, 2025Reaccreditation inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care16 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Sep 28, 2011.
  • Ownership: for-profit.
  • No deficiency or on record in the last three years.
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): 11.8 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 5.8% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 97.1% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 61% at home, 13% in assisted living, 23% in a nursing facility, 3% 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 day11.8 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends5.8%
Visits near death97.1% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • Southerncare Holdings, Inc. owns an unstated share directly since Aug 11, 2008.
  • 7 owners or officers are people: Ronald C Lazas (corporate officer, 0%); David Robinson Arnold (corporate officer, 0%); David Robinson Arnold (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Thomas Joseph Dolan (corporate officer, 0%); Penny Deeann Conlee (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); David Allen Causby (corporate officer, 0%); Janet L Combs (corporate officer, 0%).
  • No private-equity firm 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
Ch Services Midco Holdings Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Feb 5, 2015
Curo Health Services Holdings, Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Jun 6, 2014
Curo Hospice SC LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Jun 6, 2014
Charlotte Midco, LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Aug 11, 2022
Falcon Hospice, LPOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Aug 11, 2022
Charlotte Buyer, Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Jul 11, 2018
Curo Health Services LLCOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Jun 6, 2014
Kah Hospice Company, Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Mar 1, 2022
Ch Services Group Holdings Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Feb 5, 2015
Ch Services Holdings Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Feb 5, 2015
Cd&r Falcon Holdings, LPOwns 5% or more through other companies60%Aug 11, 2022
Kentucky Homecare Parent Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies40%Aug 11, 2022
Kentucky Homecare Holdings, Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies40%Aug 11, 2022
Humana Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies40%Aug 11, 2022
Centerwell Health Services Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies40%Aug 11, 2022
Ksoc Holdings, Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companiesDec 1, 2011
Southerncare Holdings, Inc.Owns 5% or more directlyAug 11, 2008

What do families say?

  • Family caregivers rate it 4 of 5 in CMS’s survey (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 87% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 89% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 10 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 99.47% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 75.9% 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 54 of 5
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 19 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 38655, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 0.5; this one had 16.
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 8, 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.