No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Landmark South Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

18180 Jefferson Hwy, Baton Rouge, LA 70817 · For profit - Corporation · 144 certified beds · (225) 291-8474 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Dec 2023Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 immediate-jeopardy citation$10,036 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Dec 2023
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $10,036 in federal fines (most recent 2024-11-14)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
16851 Jefferson Highway Ste 4C · (225) 424-1822 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
18181 Jefferson Hwy · (225) 408-1777 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
10259 Umbehagen Ln · (225) 939-2627 · Call to confirm hours
Park
17650 Brookfield Ave · (225) 272-9200 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased18.8%17.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.5%5.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.2%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.8%2.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.3%2.3%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.0%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.3%17.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.8%23.2%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.7%94.9%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers8.5%5.6%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control16.4%15.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table17.8%22.7%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.7%3.1%1.4%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%76.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission29.5%28.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit17.2%14.8%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.812.561.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.902.741.80typical

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

51.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 97 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

51.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
58.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.29U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 58.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 67 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 46% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF51.9%CMS range 40.4–58.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.8%CMS range 8.7–16.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge58.2%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge47.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge41.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified98.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.4%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.2%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.6%CMS range 3.9–12.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.331.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.27
RN hours/ resident / day
1.18
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.15
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.60
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.13
RN hoursweekends
54.9%
Total nursing turnover
40.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 144 beds and averages 138.8 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.60 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.99 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.85 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.33 to 0.13 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-14)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-11-14)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-11-14 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to follow its policy regarding advance directives by failing to ensure all medical records consistently reflected the resident's current wishes for code status for 1 (#27) of 32 residents reviewed for advanced directives. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on [DATE], when Resident #27's Advance Directive consent form was signed to indicate the resident wished to have a code status of DNR and the facility inaccurately entered a status of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) into the resident's clinical records. On [DATE], Resident #27 verbalized she wished to have a code status of DNR. On [DATE], S3LPN stated Resident #27 was a full code and would have received CPR in the event of an emergency. S1ADM was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy situation on [DATE] at 5:06 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on [DATE] at 7:58 p.m., as confirmed by onsite verification through interviews and record reviews. The facility…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-01-14 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to accurately code PASRR Level IIs on the residents' MDS assessments for 3 of 3 (#15, #101, and #128) residents reviewed with Level II PASRRs.Resident #15 Review of Resident #15's Clinical Record revealed an admission date of 05/05/2023 and diagnoses, which included Bipolar Disorder, Current Episode, Depressed, Severe, With Psychotic Features, and Personal History of Suicidal Behavior. Review of Resident #15's Form 142s revealed Resident #15 was approved for admission by Level II authority for temporary periods effective 10/24/2024 through 10/23/2025 and 10/24/2025 through 10/23/2026. Resident #15's Annual MDS with an ARD of 03/17/2025 revealed an answer of no to the following question: A1500 – Is the resident currently considered by the state level II PASRR process to have serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or a related condition? An interview was conducted with S3MDS on 01/14/2026 at 10:40 a.m. She stated she was responsible for completing MDS assessments for Resident #15. She stated when a resident had…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-11-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations and interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, and distribute foods under sanitary conditions. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Food was dated after opening; 2. Ice machine was properly cleaned and sanitized; and 3. Ice machine rolling table was properly cleaned and sanitized. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 137 out of 142 facility residents who were provided meals and beverages from the facility's kitchen. Findings: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Storage Of Refrigerated Food revealed the following, in part; Policy: The facility ensures the quality and safety of refrigerated foods through accepted storage practices. Procedure: 4. Food taken out of original containers is put in a clean sanitized container with tight fitting lid. 5. All non-hazardous, opened food are labeled with name of food, date stored. 6. All hazardous foods are labeled with name of food and date stored. During the initial tour of the facility's kitchen on 11/07/2024 at 8:40 a.m. with S4DM, the following observations were made: Walk in…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-11-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 (#113) of 5 (#14, #20, #91, #113, and #119) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications by failing to ensure: 1. Resident #113 care plan addressed her use of antidepressant and psychotropic medications; and 2. Resident #113's care plan addressed her suicidal ideations. Findings: Review of Resident #113's clinical record revealed an admission date of 10/11/2024. Further review revealed Resident #113 had diagnoses, which included Alzheimer's Disease and Anxiety Disorder. Review of Resident #113's Medication Administration Records from 10/11/2024 to 11/14/2024 revealed the following, in part: Seroquel 25 mg Give 0.5 mg by mouth at bedtime was administered from 10/11/2024 to 10/31/2024; Seroquel 25 mg Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime was administered from 11/01/2024 to 11/11/2024; Seroquel 50 mg Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime was administered from 11/12/2024 to 11/13/2024; and Lexapro 20 mg Give 1 tablet by mouth in the morning was administered from 10/12/2024 to…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-11-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of infection for 1 (#80) of 6 (#4, #24, #33, #68, #80, and #84) residents reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure staff wore proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) while providing catheter care to a resident who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, revised on 03/2024, revealed the following, in part: Enhanced Barrier Precautions involve gown and glove use during high-contact resident care activities for residents known to be colonized or infected with a MDRO as well as those at increased risk of MDRO acquisition (e.g. indwelling medical devices). For residents for whom EBP are indicated, EBP is employed when performing the following high-contact resident care activities: Device…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-18 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring for effectiveness and side effects of psychotropic medication was completed for 1 (#1) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled Psychotropic Medications dated 10/2022 revealed the following: The use of PRN psychotropic medications require a screen pre and post administration. Documentation should include behavior the drug is intended to reduce, physiological, environmental and pharmacological interventions. As well as post administration behavior and side effects. A pre and post administration screen should be completed for each use of PRN Psychotropic medications. Residents that use psychotropic medications shall have side effect monitoring. Review of the facility's policy titled Drug Administration and Documentation dated 12/2023 revealed the following: PRN medications will be documented on the MAR and the reason for giving as well as the…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-18 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure medication Carts were locked when unattended for 1 (Cart F) of 6 (Cart A, Cart B, Cart C, Cart D, Cart E, and Cart F) medication carts observed. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled Drug Administration and Documentation dated 12/2023 revealed the following: The medication cart is not to be taken into the resident's room, and therefore, is to be locked whenever unattended. On 07/17/2024 at 8:01 a.m., an observation was made of Cart F unlocked and unattended near room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 07/17/2024 at 10:15 a.m., an interview was conducted with S4LPN. She stated the medication cart should be locked at all times and confirmed Cart F was not locked when it was left unattended near room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 07/18/2024 at 11:35 a.m., an interview was conducted with S2DON. She stated medication carts should be locked when left unattended, and confirmed the surveyor should not have observed Cart F unlocked if it was left unattended.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-21 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's call light was within reach for 2 (R1 and R2) of 5 (#1, #2, #3, R1, R2) residents reviewed. Findings: Review of the facilities policy, Call Light/Bell, dated 01/2024, revealed the following, in part: Purpose: To provide the resident a means of communication with staff members Procedure 1. Ensure resident has call light in reach when in resident room 7. Place the call light within the resident's reach before leaving the room. Resident R1 A review of Resident R1's Clinical Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, which included the following, in part: Alzheimer's disease, Urinary Tract Infections, and Cognitive Communication Deficit. A review of Resident R1's current Care Plan revealed the following: Onset: 05/30/2019 Problem: Resident was at risk for injury from falls. Interventions: Place call light within reach. On 05/20/2024 at 9:40 a.m., an observation was conducted of…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-21 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an injury of unknown origin was reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the incident, to the facility Administrator and to the State Survey Agency within the specified timeframe for 1 (#1) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) residents reviewed for accidents. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled, Incident Investigation and Reporting, reviewed on 05/21/2024, dated 10/2022, revealed in part: Purpose: To provide guidance to the facility for investigation and reporting incidents of abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property and/or reportable incidents as required by state and federal requirements. 2. Relevant Terms: Injury of unknown origin: a. Source of injury was not observed by any person and b. The source of injury could not be explained by the resident and c. The injury is suspicious due to the extent or location of the injury or the number of injuries at one time or the incidence of injury over time. 3. The…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-13 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from physical abuse by Resident #39 for 1 (#17) of 3 (#17, #41 and #137) residents reviewed for abuse. The facility implemented corrective actions which were completed prior to the State Agency's investigation, thus it was determined to be a Past Noncompliance Citation. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled, Incident Investigation and Reporting revealed the following, in part: Purpose: 1. Each resident residing in this facility has the right to be free from any type of abuse including: physical abuse. Physical Abuse: this includes but is not limited to hitting, slapping, pinching and kicking. Resident #39 Review of Resident # 39's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses which included Cerebrovascular Disease, Traumatic Hemorrhage of Cerebrum without Loss of Consciousness, Lack of Coordination, Recurrent Depressive Disorders, Delusional Disorders, Bipolar…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • No harm found · C2024-07-18 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to post the required nurse staffing information on a daily basis. Findings: On 07/18/2024 at 8:15 a.m., an observation was made of posted staffing dated 07/17/2024. On 07/18/2024 at 10:00 a.m., an observation was made of posted staffing dated 07/17/2024. On 07/18/2024 at 12:30 p.m., an observation was made of posted staffing dated 07/17/2024. On 07/18/2024 at 12:55 p.m., an interview was conducted with S3WC. S3WC stated she was responsible for posting the daily staffing information. She stated she did not post the daily staffing information for the day, and should have. On 07/18/2024 at 1:03 p.m., an interview was conducted with S1ADM. He stated S3WC was responsible for posting the daily staffing information. He confirmed the daily staffing currently posted was dated 07/17/2024 and was not current.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$10,036 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $10,036 — penalty dated 2024-11-14

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE BEEBE FAMILY — 48 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.0+1.0 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 53.3-1.3 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 52.0+1.0 vs chain
The other 47 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
1 of 5Gulfport Care CenterGulfport, MS 1 of 5Heritage Manor Of Baton Rouge IIBaton Rouge, LA 1 of 5Heritage Manor Of OpelousasOpelousas, LA 1 of 5Humphreys Co Nursing CenterBelzoni, MS 1 of 5Lawrence Co Nursing CenterMonticello, MS 1 of 5Lexington HouseAlexandria, LA 1 of 5Riverview Care CenterBossier City, LA 1 of 5Southern Hills Healthcare And RehabilitationShreveport, LA 1 of 5The SummitAlexandria, LA 1 of 5Tishomingo ManorIuka, MS 2 of 5Attala County Nursing CenterKosciusko, MS 2 of 5Heritage Manor WestShreveport, LA 2 of 5Highland HomeRidgeland, MS 2 of 5Landmark Nursing Center HammondHammond, LA 2 of 5Landmark Of DesotoHorn Lake, MS 2 of 5Matthews Memorial Health Care CenterAlexandria, LA 2 of 5Myrtles Nursing Center, LLCColumbia, MS 2 of 5Perry County Nursing CenterRichton, MS 2 of 5Sardis Community NhSardis, MS 2 of 5Tunica County Health & Rehab, LLCTunica, MS 3 of 5Clarksdale Nursing CenterClarksdale, MS 3 of 5Copiah Living CenterCrystal Springs, MS 3 of 5Heritage Manor Of Ville PlatteVille Platte, LA 3 of 5Heritage Manor of HoumaHouma, LA 3 of 5J G Alexander Nursing CenterUnion, MS 3 of 5Landmark Of RayneRayne, LA 3 of 5Landmark of Baton RougeBaton Rouge, LA 3 of 5Landmark of Lake CharlesLake Charles, LA 3 of 5Senior Village Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterOpelousas, LA 3 of 5Washington Care CenterGreenville, MS 4 of 5Audubon Health and RehabThibodaux, LA 4 of 5Brandon CourtBrandon, MS 4 of 5Camellia EstatesMcComb, MS 4 of 5Forest Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterCovington, LA 4 of 5Heritage House Nursing CenterVicksburg, MS 4 of 5Heritage Manor Of SlidellSlidell, LA 4 of 5Heritage Manor Of Stratmore Nursing & Rehab CtrShreveport, LA 4 of 5Heritage Manor SouthShreveport, LA 4 of 5Hillcrest Nursing CenterMagee, MS 4 of 5Landmark Of AcadianaSaint Martinville, LA

Showing 40 of 47; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
ACT INVESTMENTS, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST15%since 01/01/2010
MEDICO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL85%since 01/01/2010
DAVID & FELICIA STALLARD CHILD TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST5%since 01/01/2010
ELTON GLYNN BEEBE JR. & NANCY DOTY BEEBE IRRV TR UAOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST5%since 01/01/2010
GERARD AND ALISON DANOS CHILDRENS TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2010
JOSEPH & ALISON SADLER CHILDREN TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2010
PARKINSON, TONIIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2010
ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT SERVICES INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2010
ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2010
PATHWAY SOUTH LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2013
PROVIDENCE CARE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/07/2020
PROVIDER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2010
TRISTAR REHAB INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2024
BEEBE, BOBBYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/11/2021
BEEBE, ELTONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2010
DILLE, LAURAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/01/2020
GREMILLION, BRIANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/1997
SMITH, JAMESIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/06/2015
STALLARD, DAVIDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/07/2020
THIBODAUX, EARLIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2013
ALISONS 2016 FAM TR NO 2OrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
ARIA CARE MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2022
BEEBE 2013 CHILDRENS TR NGOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
FELICIAS 2016 FAM TR NO 2OrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
LECC BATON ROUGE LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
LOUISIANA EXTENDED CARE CENTERS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
LTC HIM CONSULTING INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/02/2007
PHARMACEUTICAL CONSULTING SERVICES OF AMERICA LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/06/2011
QSST TR FOR ALISON BEEBE SADLER DANOS AND HER DESCENDANTSOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
VERDIN ENTERPRISES, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 11/01/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 43 rows in the source record cover these 30 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

22 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$15.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+7.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.5M
Related-party expense11% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 62%Medicare 8%Other / private 30%

This home reported $1.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$282per resident / day
operating cost
$8,569per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$304per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in LA

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Louisiana Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Louisiana
$7,604/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$8,076/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,163/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 195480. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-14, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next