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

Claiborne Rehabilitation

6942 Highway 79, Homer, LA 71040 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 70 certified beds · (318) 927-3586 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0604, F0609) — most recent Sep 20242 immediate-jeopardy citations$65,988 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $65,988 in federal fines (most recent 2023-12-28)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • about 18% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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.

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

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
1/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
620 E College St · (318) 927-2024 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
911 W Main St · (318) 826-1211 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
817 W Main St · (318) 927-9651 · Call to confirm hours
Park
168 Morris Cir · (318) 927-2976 · 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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 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 1 to 3 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 rating3★
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 increased15.4%17.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight12.5%5.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.0%1.2%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%2.1%2.0%better
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 injury3.6%3.5%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.1%17.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication28.1%23.2%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.7%94.9%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.0%5.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control5.8%15.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table40.7%22.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication4.5%3.1%1.4%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission36.2%28.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.3%14.8%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.402.561.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.742.741.80worse

* 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.

12.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.21U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.06hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 25% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% 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 SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.9%CMS range 8.3–18.210.7%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot 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 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 — 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 staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.051.02Oct 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

0.59
RN hours/ resident / day
0.78
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.16
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.53
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.35
RN hoursweekends
30.3%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 70 beds and averages 48.0 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 22 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.53 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.16 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 3.06 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.72 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.68 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-17)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-05)

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · K2023-12-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure 1 (#1) of 2 (#1, #2) residents whom was assessed at high risk for elopement, was adequately supervised to prevent him from eloping from the facility. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 12/18/2023 at approximately 5:30 p.m. when Resident #1 (a severely cognitively impaired resident identified as an elopement risk), was unsupervised and eloped from the facility. Resident #1 was found lying on the ground of a creek bank approximately ¼ of a mile from the facility on 12/18/2023 at 8:06 p.m. by the Sherriff's Department. Resident #1 was taken to the local emergency department for evaluation. Review of the local emergency department notes dated 12/18/2023 at 9:35 p.m. revealed Resident #1's skin temperature was cool, abrasions sustained to head, neck, right and left arm, right and left hand, buttocks, back of left and right leg, back, and right hip. Resident #1 was covered in debris including leaves,…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · K2023-12-28 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — pattern
    Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
    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, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently by failing to have an adequate system in place to ensure 1 (#1) of 2 (#1, #2) residents (whom were at high risk for elopement and resided in the secured unit), was adequately supervised to prevent Resident #1 from eloping. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 12/18/2023 at approximately 5:30 p.m. when Resident #1 (a severely cognitively impaired resident identified as an elopement risk), was unsupervised and eloped from the facility. Resident #1 was found lying on the ground of a creek bank approximately ¼ of a mile from the facility on 12/18/2023 at 8:06 p.m. by the Sherriff's Department. Resident #1 was taken to the local emergency department for evaluation. Review of the local emergency department notes dated 12/18/2023 at 9:35 p.m. revealed Resident #1's skin temperature was cool, abrasions sustained 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-09-17 · tag F0628 — pattern
    Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
    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 provide written notice to residents and/or their RP (Responsible Party) of the bed hold agreement at time of transfer and update the emergency transfer log (Notice of Discharge to the ombudsman) for 1 (#7) of 2 (#7 & #44) residents reviewed for hospitalizations. Findings:Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed an admission date of 11/05/2024 and diagnoses of unspecified protein-calorie malnutrition, repeated falls, muscle weakness (generalized), and dementia. Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed the following transfer dates: 01/31/2025, 05/22/2025, and 07/10/2025. Review of Resident #7's bed hold agreement form failed to reveal notification to resident/RP was sent at time of transfer for dates 01/31/2025 and 05/22/2025. Further review failed to reveal Resident #7's bed hold agreement was sent at discharge on [DATE]. During an interview on 09/16/2025 at 1:55 p.m. S3 Business Office Manager reported Resident #7's bed hold agreement…

    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 · E2025-09-17 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, observation, and an interview the facility failed to ensure services provided met professional standards of quality for 1 (#5) of 1 resident with a peg (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy) tube observed during medication administration. Review of facility's Administering Medications through an Enteral Tube policy (revision date 01/15/2025) revealed in part:Purpose: The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the safe administration of medications through an enteral tube. Steps in Procedure:6. Verify placement of feeding tube:a. If you suspect improper tube positioning, do not administer feeding or medication. Notify the Charge Nurse or Physician. Review of Resident #5's medical diagnoses revealed the following but not limited to encounter for attention to gastrostomy, unspecified psychosis not due to a substance or known physiological condition, and intractable status epilepticus. Review of Resident #5's September 2025 physician orders revealed: 08/29/2025: Isosource 1.5cal (calorie) at 55ml (milliliters)/hour to total 660ml/990kcal (calorie…

    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 · E2025-09-17 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide current pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident as evidenced by having expired medications and supplies readily available for resident use on 1 (cart A) of 1 medication cart and in 1 (medication storage room A) of 2 medication storage rooms observed. Findings:Review of the facility's Storage of Medications policy dated 01/15/2025 revealed in part:4. Discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals are destroyed. Expiration dates should be used on the manufactured label.An observation on 09/17/2025 at 9:11 a.m. with S4 DON (Director Of Nursing) revealed medication storage room A contained multiple medications available for use with expiration dates of:1.) 3 bottles- UTI (Urinary Tract Infection) Stat dated 06/25/2025 2.) 9 bottles- Iodoform packing strips dated 07/20253.) 2 bottles- Unna-2 zinc paste bandages dated 02/2024 and 01/01/20254.) 1 box (144 packets)- hydrocortisone cream 1% dated 11/2024 (opened)During an interview on 09/17/2025 at 9:12 a.m. S4 DON confirmed…

    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 · Ecited before2024-09-05 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — pattern
    Provide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
    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 ensure residents' medical records reflected the resident's advance directive wishes for 1 (#6) of 19 (#1, #6, #7, #9, #10, #17, #18, #24, #27, #28, #29, #32, #36, #37, #38, #39, #90, #92, #240) total sampled residents. The facility failed to ensure the profile page, physician's orders, medication administration records, comprehensive care plan and LaPost (Louisiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment) were consistent with the resident's wishes for advance directives. Findings: Review of Resident #6's medical record revealed an admit date of [DATE] and Resident #6's profile page indicated Resident #6's code status to be Full Code: May use AED (automated external defibrillator) unless contraindicated. Review of Resident #6's physician orders revealed an order dated [DATE] for Full Code, may use AED unless contraindicated. Further review revealed an order dated [DATE] admit to hospice. Review of Resident #6's August and [DATE] medication…

    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 · E2024-09-05 · tag F0700 — pattern
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    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, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the correct use and the maintenance of bed rails by ensuring residents were care planned for the use of bed rails, assessed for the risk of entrapment from bed rails, and a written order was obtained from the physician for bed rails prior to installation for 4 (#7, #27, #90, #240) out of 5 (#6, #7, #27, #90, #240) residents reviewed for accidents. Findings: Resident #7 Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed an admit date of 09/10/2019 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia with behavioral disturbance, and lack of coordination. Review of Resident #7's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 7 indicating severely impaired cognition and Resident #7 was totally dependent of one staff for bed mobility. Review of Resident #7's medical record failed to reveal a physician's order for bed rails, a…

    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 · Ecited before2024-09-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of infection. The facility failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were in place. This deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the facilities 46 residents. Findings: Review of the facility's policy Enhanced Barrier Precautions with and effective date of 04/01/2024 revealed in part: Definition and Scope: Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) are infection control interventions designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Example of Use: EBP involve gown and glove use during high-contact resident care activities for residents know to be colonized or infected with a MDRO as well as those at increased risk of MDRO acquisition (e.g. residents with wounds or indwelling medical devices). Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) refer to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-05 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
    Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident has a right to be free from any physical restraint not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for 1 (#37) resident out of 2 (#37 and #90) residents investigated for physical restraints. The facility failed to ensure 1.) A written order was in place 2.) A consent for the use of a lap tray was obtained, 3.) A specific reason for the restraint and 4.) An assessment was completed for the use of a lap tray for Resident #37. Findings: Review of the facility's Use of Restraints policy with a revision date of 01/12/2024 revealed in part: Policy Statement: Restraints shall only be used for the safety and well-being of the resident(s) and only after other alternatives have been tried unsuccessfully. Restraints shall only be used to treat the resident's medical symptom(s) and never for discipline or staff convenience, or for the prevention of falls. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. Physical Restraints are defined as any manual method of physical or mechanical device, material…

    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 · D2023-12-28 · 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 reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident's elopement from the facility was reported to the State Survey Agency in accordance with State law no later than 24 hours for 1 (#1) of 3 (#1, #2, #3) sampled residents. Findings: Review of the current Facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation-Reporting and Investigating policy revealed in part: All reports of resident abuse (including injuries of unknown origin), neglect, exploitation, or theft/misappropriation of resident property are reported to local, state and federal agencies (as required by current regulations) and thoroughly investigated by facility management. Findings of all investigations are documented and reported. Policy Interpretation and Implementation Reporting Allegations to the Administrator and authorities 1. If resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property or injury of unknown soured is suspected, the suspicion must be reported immediately to the administrator 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-20 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — pattern
    Provide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
    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 provider failed to ensure a resident's code status was correct for 1(Resident #10) of 1(Resident #10) reviewed for advanced directives/code status. Findings: Record review of Resident #10's EHR (Electronic Health Record) revealed Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of displaced intertrochanteric fracture of left femur, initial encounter for closed fracture. Record review of Resident #10's physician orders in EHR for [DATE] revealed there was no code status ordered. Record review of Resident #10's medical record revealed the following: 1. A red colored paper with STOP DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) for Resident #10 dated [DATE]. 2. A LaPOST (Louisiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment) dated [DATE] indicated to do CPR (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation). Record review of Resident #10's MDS (Minimum Data Set), Section C showed a BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) of 12 that would indicate moderately impaired. Record review of Resident…

    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 · E2023-09-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 (#7) of 2 (#7, #44) sampled residents reviewed for skin conditions and 1 (#12) of 1 (#12) sampled resident reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Resident #7's wound care was conducted as ordered. 2. Resident #12's wound care and Calmoseptine ointment to perineal area was completed daily. Findings: Resident #7: Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses that included, in part, other specified disorders of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, localized edema, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, osteoarthritis, [NAME] tear, unspecified cerebral infarction, and combined systolic (congestive) and diastolic(congestive) heart failure. Review of Resident #7's 05/30/2023 Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) revealed Resident #7 had a BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status)…

    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 · Ecited before2023-09-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control and prevention program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment by failing to ensure staff performed hand hygiene while serving dietary trays and beverages. The deficient practice had the potential to affect 46 residents according to the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents Report. Findings: An observation on 09/18/2023 at 12:15 p.m. during lunch revealed S6 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) began serving the residents' lunch trays and beverages from the dietary cart. S6 CNA served lunch trays and beverages to room a, room b, room c, room d, room e, room f, and room g. The surveyor observed S6 CNA touch the residents' door knobs, overbed tables, and a resident's wheelchair without using hand sanitizer in between each residents' room while he passed their trays. During an interview on 09/18/2023 at 12:30p.m. S6 CNA revealed he only used hand sanitizer in the dining room when he picked up the dietary cart. S6 CNA confirmed he did not use hand sanitizer each time he…

    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 · E2023-09-20 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — pattern
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure all patient care equipment was maintained in safe operating condition by failing to repair equipment for 3 (#6, #22, #36) residents out of 21 residents with mobility in a chair all or most of the time according to the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents Report. The facility failed to maintain the following patient care equipment: a wheelchair arm rest (#6); a wheelchair arm tray (#22); and brakes on a gerichair (#36). Findings: Resident #6: An observation on 09/18/2023 at 10:00 a.m. revealed Resident #6's left arm rest on his wheelchair was dirty, the material was peeling away and the corners were torn. During an interview on 09/20/2023 at 1:15 p.m. S3 LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse)/ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) observed and acknowledged Resident #6 was in need of a new left arm rest for his wheelchair. S3 LPN/ADON acknowledged Resident #6's arm rest had tears, peeling material and was dirty. Resident # 22: An observation on 09/18/2023 at 11:35 a.m. and 09/19/2023 at 9:44 a.m. revealed Resident # 22…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-20 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    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 Discharge MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment and a readmission MDS Assessment was completed after a resident was discharged from and readmitted to the facility. The deficient practice affected 1 (#36) of 2 (#36, #102) residents investigated for hospitalizations. Findings: Review of Resident #1's EHR (Electronic Health Record) revealed an original admission date of 08/18/2012. Review of Resident #36's Nurses Notes dated 08/11/2023 at 11:25 a.m. revealed the ambulance service was called for transportation and the ER (Emergency Room) was notified. Review of Nurses Notes dated 08/11/2023 at 12:02 p.m. revealed an ambulance service transported Resident #36 to a local hospital for further evaluation and treatment. Review of Resident #36's Nurses Notes dated 08/11/2023 at 13:25 p.m. revealed Resident #36 was admitted to the hospital. Review of Resident #36's paper chart revealed Physician Order dated 08/16/2023 to continue previous orders. Review 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-20 · tag F0637 — isolated
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    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 Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment was completed within 14 days of a resident sustaining a right hip fracture for 1 (#45) of 2 (#7, #45) sampled residents reviewed for falls. Findings: Record review revealed Resident #45 had diagnoses including a history of cerebrovascular accident and a nondisplaced intertrochanteric fracture of the right femur. Record review of Resident #45's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed he had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated no cognitive impairment. Further review of his functional status revealed he required the following assistance: supervision/set up help only for eating; supervision/1 person assistance for bed mobility, transfer, walk in room/corridor, dressing and toilet use; and limited assistance/1 person assistance for personal hygiene. Record review of Resident #45's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed he had a BIMS score of 8, which…

    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

“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

$65,988 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $65,988 — penalty dated 2023-12-28

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 PARAMOUNT HEALTHCARE CONSULTANTS — 14 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 2 of 52.4-0.4 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.9-0.9 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 52.3+1.7 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 52.0≈ chain avg
The other 13 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)

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
DCZ1 VENTURE LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF43%since 08/31/2016
PHC GROUP LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST10%since 08/31/2016
SAH HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF47%since 08/31/2016
HOPPER, KEVINIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF50%since 08/31/2016
CLAIBORNE PROPERTY GROUP, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2008
TAYLOR, FELECIAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/18/2022
PARAMOUNT HEALTHCARE CONSULTANTS, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2018
HAYNES, DONALDIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 08/31/2016
SMITH, DAWNEIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 08/31/2016

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

5 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.

$4.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$766K
Related-party expense18% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 78%Medicare 7%Other / private 15%

About 78% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $766K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% 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

$260per resident / day
operating cost
$7,914per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$263per 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 195545. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-17, 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