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

Ormond Nursing & Care Center

22 Plantation Road, Destrehan, LA 70047 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 146 certified beds · (985) 764-1793 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (985) 764-1793 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0607) — cited Nov 2023
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • 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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
105 Plantation Rd · (985) 764-3001 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1950 Ormond Blvd · (985) 307-2325 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Rouses1.3 mi
12519 Airline Hwy. Suite A
Park
1901 Ormond Blvd · (985) 783-5090 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1973 Ormond Blvd · (985) 764-4100

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 held steady at 5 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 rating5★
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 increased7.8%17.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.4%5.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.2%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.8%2.1%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%2.3%6.5%check this — see note marked star 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 injury3.3%3.5%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.5%17.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication17.6%23.2%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.9%94.9%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.3%5.6%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.4%15.8%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table21.9%22.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%3.1%1.4%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine88.5%76.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission29.8%28.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit17.6%14.8%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.992.561.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.572.741.80worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

46.1% 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 34 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

46.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
66.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.44U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.21hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 66.7% 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 24 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 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 74% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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 SNF46.1%CMS range 31.9–63.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.6–15.810.7%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 discharge66.7%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 discharge70.8%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 discharge62.5%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 identified89.7%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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%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 worsened3.5%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 hospitalization7.7%CMS range 3.9–13.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.161.02Oct 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

0.19
RN hours/ resident / day
1.05
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.05
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.28
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.10
RN hoursweekends
47.1%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 146 beds and averages 105.0 residents a day — about 72% occupied, or roughly 41 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.28 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.19 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 2.77 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.49 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.23 to 0.10 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-23)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-17)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-23 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed for a resident with exit seeking behaviors to decrease the risk of elopement (an individual who was incapable of adequately protecting themselves who left a health care facility undetected and unsupervised) for 1 (Resident #12) of 6 (Resident #4, Resident #12, Resident #58, Resident #72, Resident #80, and Resident #90) sampled residents reviewed for accidents hazards.Findings: Review of the facility's Care Plan Process policy and procedure, dated 06/2015 and revised on 12/2024, revealed, in part, the care plan was driven by a resident's unique needs. Further review revealed a well-developed and executed care plan would provide information regarding how the causes and risks associated with issues and/or conditions were addressed to provide for a resident's highest practicable level of well-being. Further review revealed the facility would re-evaluate the resident's status annually and then modify the individualized…

    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 · D2025-07-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents did not have cigarette lighters in their possession per facility policy for 1 (Resident #90) of 6 (Resident #4, Resident #12, Resident #58, Resident #72, Resident #80, Resident #90) sampled residents investigated for accident hazards.Findings:Review of the facility's Smoking Policy and regulations, dated 04/2006 and revised on 10/2024, revealed, in part, cigarette lighters and matches were not permitted in a resident's room and would be kept at the nursing station. Visitors were not permitted to smoke in the facility, nor were they permitted to give or leave matches or lighters with any resident.Review of Resident #90's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/09/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #90 was a current tobacco user. Review of Resident #90's Care Plan initiated on 05/28/2025, with a goal date of 09/05/2025, revealed, in part, residents smoking supplies were stored per the facility policy. Observation on 07/22/2025 at 10:12AM, of the smoker's patio,…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-22 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on Interviews and record reviews the facility failed to administer a medication as ordered for 1 (Resident#1) of 3 (Resident#1, Resident#2, Resident #3) sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings: Review of the facility's policy and procedure on Medication Administration with an effective date of 10/04/2024, revealed, in part, nursing personnel shall ensure the safe and effective administration of medications. Further review revealed, prior to administration, the nursing staff member administering the medication shall ensure medications match the physician's orders and label, and that the proper dose was administered. Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed, in part, an admission date of 11/18/2024. Further review revealed Resident #1 had the following diagnoses, in part, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) gastric esophageal reflux disease (GERD) and unspecified psychosis. Review of Resident #1's physician orders revealed, in part, an order dated 01/31/2025 for Ondansetron 4 milligrams (mg) by mouth p.o. every 6 hours for 3 days. In an…

    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 · D2024-07-31 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    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 interview the facility failed to ensure a resident and the resident's representative was issued a written notice of discharge prior to discharging a resident. This deficient practice was identified for 1 (Resident #1) of 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) sampled residents reviewed for discharge requirements. Findings: Review of Resident #1's clinical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Further review revealed Resident #1 was discharged from the facility on 05/27/2024 because Resident #1's representative was unable to make the bed hold payments. In an interview on 07/31/2024 at 10:30 a.m., S2Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) indicated the cost of the facility's bed hold price and amount was given and explained at length to Resident #1's representative. S2ADON further indicated Resident #1's representative knew the cost to hold Resident #1's bed, and Resident #1's representative did not make payments to the facility. There was no documented evidence and…

    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 · D2024-07-17 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to assess a resident for self-administration of medications for 2 (Resident #22 and Resident #97) of 20 (Resident #2, Resident #13, Resident #16, Resident #17, Resident #22, Resident #25, Resident #26, Resident #39, Resident #44, Resident #61, Resident #64, Resident #67, Resident #69, Resident #70, Resident #79, Resident #77, Resident #80, Resident #88, Resident #95, and Resident #97) sampled residents reviewed. Findings: Review of the facility's Self-Administration of Medications policy with a revision date of 11/2017 revealed, in part, residents would be allowed to self-administer medications only if a physician order was obtained allowing residents to keep a medication at bedside for the purpose of self-administration, and the interdisciplinary team deemed resident to be clinically appropriate to self-administer medications. Review of the facility's Drug Administration and Documentation policy with a revision date of 12/2023 revealed, in part, under no circumstances is medication to be left at the bedside…

    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 · D2024-07-17 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    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 a resident with a mental illness had an accurate PASARR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) for 1 (Resident #67) of 2 (Resident #17, Resident #67) residents reviewed for PASARR. Findings: Review of Resident #67's Medical Record review revealed, in part, Resident #67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder). Review of Resident #67's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 05/30/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #67 had a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Review of Resident #67's Level I PASARR dated 10/07/2020 revealed, in part, Resident #67's diagnosis of PTSD was not selected on Section III as a mental illness. In an interview on 07/17/2024 at 10:03 a.m., S3Social Service Director indicated Resident #67 did not have a Level II PASARR, and the facility could not produce any documented evidence that a Level II PASARR for a diagnosis of PTSD was completed and…

    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 · D2023-11-07 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented their Policy & Procedure for abuse for 1 (Resident #2) of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) sampled residents reviewed for abuse. Findings: Review of the facility's Elder Justice Act policy with a revision date of 04/2022 revealed, in part, it is the facility's policy to comply with the Elder Justice Act (EJA) about reporting a reasonable suspicion of a crime, under Section 1150B of the Social Security Act, as established by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Further review revealed staff must report the suspicion of an incident to the administrator. Resident #2 Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/12/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 which indicated she was cognitively intact. In an interview on 11/06/2023 at 9:08 a.m., S2Housekeeper asked the state surveyor to talk Resident #2 stating the resident wanted to report something. In an interview on…

    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 · Ecited before2023-08-31 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    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 observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to: 1.) Ensure resident's interventions were updated after a fall for 1 (Resident #44) of 3 (Resident #19, Resident #44, and Resident #78); and, 2.) Ensure a resident's intervention listed in the Comprehensive Care Plan was implemented for 1 (Resident #78) of 3 (Resident #19, Resident #44, and Resident #78) sampled residents reviewed for falls. Findings: 1. Resident #44 Review of Resident #44's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with and Assessment Reference Date (ARD) revealed, in part, Resident #44 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 8 (a score of 8-12 indicated a resident had moderately impaired cognition). Review of Resident #44's care plan with a target date of 09/30/2023 revealed Resident #44 was at risk for falls with a fall on 06/02/2023. Review revealed a new intervention for the fall on 06/02/2023 was not initiated. In an interview on 08/29/2023 at 3:04 p.m., S8Liscensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated Resident #44 had a fall last week. S8LPN stated Resident #44 was recently moved to this room and was…

    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 · E2023-08-31 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — pattern
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    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 monitor the oral intake of 2 (Resident #63 and Resident #106) of 2 residents investigated for nutrition. Findings: Review of the facility's Food Intake Records policy revealed, in part, the intake of each resident should be documented at each meal. Resident #63 Review of Resident #63's Registered Dietician (RD) Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] revealed, in part, to monitor Resident #63's oral intake. Review of Resident #63's log of percentage of meals eaten revealed, in part, no documentation of the percentage of breakfast eaten 08/17/2023, 08/22/2023, 08/23/2023, 08/24/2023, 08/26/2023, and 08/27/2023, no documentation of the percentage of lunch eaten on 08/17/2023, 08/22/2023, 08/23/2023, 08/24/2023, and 08/27/2023 and no documentation of the percentage of dinner eaten on 08/15/2023, 08/17/2023, 08/19/2023, 08/21/2023, 08/22/2023, 08/24/2023, 08/25/2023, 08/26/2023, 08/27/2023, and 08/29/2023. In an interview on 08/31/2023 at 10:13…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-31 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician and responsible party of a resident's onset of loose stools and bilateral buttock wounds for 1 (Resident #79) of 1 (Resident #79) sampled residents reviewed for skin conditions. Findings: Review of Resident #79's departmental notes, revealed, in part, the following: 1. 08/19/2023 the Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) reported one episode of loose stool; and, 2. 08/30/2023 the CNA reported loose stools this shift; and, 3. 08/31/2023 the CNA reported one episode of loose stool. Further review revealed no documented evidence the physician or responsible party was notified of Resident #79's loose stools. Review of Resident #79's August 2023 Physician's orders revealed, in part, orders dated 08/24/2023 to cleanse left and right buttock moisture associated skin damage (MASD) with normal saline, pat dry and apply calmoseptine ointment (moisture barrier that protects and helps heal skin irritations) daily until resolved. Review of Resident #79's departmental notes, revealed, in part, no documented…

    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 · D2023-08-31 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to: 1) Ensure a residents wounds were assessed; and, 2) Ensure a resident was provided treatment for loose stools for 1 (Resident #79) of 1 (Resident #79) sampled residents reviewed for skin conditions. Findings: Review of the facility's prevention and treatment of skin issues policy revealed, in part, the facility should properly identify and assess residents whose clinical conditions increase the risk for impaired skin integrity to implement preventative measures and to provide appropriate treatment. Further review revealed, for newly identified skin issues staff should implement weekly wound documentation in the Wound Assessment Manager (WAM) to include: type of wound, location, date, length, width, depth, wound base description, and wound edge description. 1. Review of Resident #79's August 2023 Physician's orders revealed, in part, an order dated 08/24/2023 to cleanse left and right buttock moisture associated skin damage (MASD) with normal saline, pat dry and apply calmoseptine ointment (moisture barrier…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
ONCC MANAGEMENT LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2010
STALLARD, DAVIDIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2010
ONCC INVESTMENTS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2010
SADLER, JOSEPHIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO 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
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
ARENCIBIA, LUISIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2017
BEEBE, BOBBYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/11/2021
SCHMITT, JEFFREYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/29/2016
WAMMES, NICOLEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2021
ARIA CARE MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
CHILDREN OF JOSEPH WILLIAM SADLER IRRV TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
LTC HIM CONSULTING INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/10/2007
ONCC PROPERTIES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
PHARMACEUTICAL CONSULTING SERVICES OF AMERICA LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/19/2011
VERDIN ENTERPRISES, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 11/01/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 36 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

13 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.

$9.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+9.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$876K
Related-party expense10% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 70%Medicare 3%Other / private 27%

This home reported $876K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$243per resident / day
operating cost
$7,388per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$268per 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 195221. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-23, 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