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

Vermilion Health Care Center

14008 Cheneau Road, Kaplan, LA 70548 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (337) 643-1949 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (337) 643-1949 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 12 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
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
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)

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

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

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
109 E 5th St · (337) 643-8096 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
100 N Cushing Ave · (337) 643-6440 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
801 E 1st St · (337) 643-1526 · Call to confirm hours
Park
W Pirates Ln @ E 1st St · 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 1 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 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 2 to 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 increased12.2%17.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.5%5.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.2%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection3.3%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 injury3.5%3.5%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.6%17.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication39.0%23.2%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.8%94.9%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.7%5.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.2%15.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table25.1%22.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication13.0%3.1%1.4%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission39.1%28.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit23.5%14.8%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.222.561.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.312.741.80worse

* 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.

9.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
43.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.21U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.07hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 43.8% 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 32 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 24% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% 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 SNF9.8%CMS range 6.6–15.110.7%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 discharge43.8%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 discharge50.0%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 discharge40.6%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 identified100.0%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 — 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 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 worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.6%CMS range 4.0–13.67.1%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

0.20
RN hours/ resident / day
0.96
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.38
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.54
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.19
RN hoursweekends
43.8%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 87.4 residents a day — about 73% occupied, or roughly 33 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 3.54 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.20 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.38 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 3.04 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.74 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.20 to 0.19 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% 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

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-10)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-25)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · F2024-09-25 · tag F0577 — widespread
    Allow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the provider failed to ensure the most recent survey results for the facility were posted in a place readily accessible to residents, family members, and legal representatives of residents. The facility's census was 94 residents. Findings: On 09/23/2024 at 1:30 p.m., an observation was made of a blue binder labeled Survey Results was located in a clear plastic document holder mounted to the wall across from the Nurses station near the main entrance just outside of the Minimum Data Nurses (MDS) office. A review of the Survey Results binder revealed the results and the plans of correction from the last annual survey dated 08/02/2023 and a complaint survey that was conducted 04/04/2023. The results of the most recent complaint survey conducted 10/04/2023 were not in the binder. On 09/24/2024 at 12:44 p.m., an interview was conducted with S6Adm (Administrator) who stated all recent survey results were available in the blue binder in a wall pocket just outside of the MDS Nurse Station Office. S6Adm then reviewed the contents of the binder and 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-25 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, observations and interviews, the facility failed to develop an/or implement a comprehensive person-centered plan of care for 3 (#10, #49 and #88) out of 31 sampled residents as evidenced by failing to: 1. follow the plan of care to address Resident #49's elevated blood sugar; 2. develop a person-centered plan of care to address hearing deficits for Resident #88; and 3. follow the plan of care for Resident #10 for ensuring the chair alarm was functioning properly. 1. Resident #49 Review of Resident #49's electronic medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included in part: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Review of the resident's physician's orders revealed in part .Novolin R (regular) Injection Solution 100 UNIT/ML (milliliter), inject as per sliding scale: >400=15U (units) recheck in 1 hour, then if >400 (greater than) =15U and call MD/NP, subcutaneously four times a day. Review of the resident's MARs (Medication Administration…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-25 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    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, observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate and sufficient services, treatment and care according to standards of professional practice for 1 (#49) of 2 (#49, and #64) residents that were reviewed for urinary catheter or UTI (urinary tract infection). The facility failed to ensure Resident #49's urinary catheter drainage tubing was properly secured off of the floor. Findings: Resident #49 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, Urinary Tract Infection, Acute Cystitis without Hematuria. A review of Resident #49's quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 08/19/2024 section H revealed yes for indwelling catheter. On 09/23/2024 at 9:07 a.m., an observation was conducted of Resident #49 in her room. The resident had a urinary catheter, the catheter bag was covered and placed underneath the wheelchair, and the drainage tubing part was under her wheelchair touching the floor. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-10-24 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) accurately reflected the resident's status by failing to accurately code the resident for serious mental illness for 1 (#3) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) sampled residents. Findings: A review of Resident #3's electronic record revealed he was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Paranoid Schizophrenia. A review of Resident #3's admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 08/28/2023 revealed he had a BIMS (Basic Interview for Mental Status) of 3, indicating he had severe cognitive impairment. Further review revealed Resident #3 had behavioral symptoms that interfered with resident care, social activities, and intruded on privacy of others. Section A1510A which asked if he had a serious mental illness was blank. A review of Resident #3's Social Services' Progress Notes revealed in part, 08/21/2023 at 10:38 a.m., S1SSD (Social Service Director) wrote: His Dx (Diagnoses) are as follows: Paranoid Schizophrenia . On 10/24/2023 at 08:36 a.m., an interview was conducted with S6MDS who…

    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 · D2023-10-24 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    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 refer a resident with a possible serious mental disorder for a Level II PASARR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) evaluation to the appropriate state-designated authority after the resident was readmitted to the facility following an inpatient psychiatric stay for 1(#3) out of 3 (#1, #2 and #3) sampled residents. This deficient practice placed Resident #3 at risk of not receiving or benefiting from specialized services the resident may have needed. Findings: A review of the facility's policy titled Resident Assessment-Coordination with PASARR Program read in part, Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: .6. The Social Services Director or designee shall be responsible for keeping track of each resident's PASARR screening status, and referring to the appropriate authority .9. Any resident who exhibits a newly evident possible serious mental disorder intellectual disability, or a related condition will be referred promptly to the state…

    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 · D2023-10-24 · 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

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of a Level I PASARR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) for a resident with a diagnosis of Paranoid Schizophrenia upon admission to the facility for 1(#3) out of 3 (#1, #2 and #3) sampled residents. This deficient practice placed Resident #3 at risk of not receiving or benefiting from specialized services the resident may have needed. Findings: A review of the facility's policy titled Resident Assessment-Coordination with PASARR Program read in part, Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: .1. All applicants to this facility will be screened for serious mental disorders .in accordance with the State's Medicaid rules for screening. a. PASSAR Level I - initial screening that is completed prior to admission . 6. The Social Service Director or designee shall be responsible for keeping track of each resident's PASARR screening status, and referring to the appropriate authority . A review of Resident #3's electronic record revealed he was admitted to the facility from a rehabilitation facility…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-08-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Resident #23 Review of the facility's policy, Laryngectomy Care and Suctioning read in part: It is the policy of this facility to ensure that a resident with a laryngectomy stoma receives care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences. Review of the facility's policy, Personal Protective Equipment read in part: Personal Protective Equipment or PPE refers to a variety of barriers used alone or in combination to protect mucous membranes, skin, and clothing from contact with pathogens. It includes gloves, gowns, face protection (facemasks, goggles, and face shields) .PPE will be utilized as part of standard precautions regardless of a resident's suspected or confirmed infection status .Indications/considerations for PPE use: Perform hand hygiene before donning gloves and after removal. Gloves are not a substitute for hand hygiene .Change gloves and perform hand hygiene between clean and dirty tasks .Wear a mask 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-08-02 · 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 records review, interviews, and observations, the facility failed to ensure the resident's care plan and physician's order(s), were followed for 2 (#45, #67) out of 35 sampled residents. This was evidenced when: 1. Facility staff failed to monitor for bleeding or bruising for an anticoagulant (blood thinner) for Resident #45 2. Facility staff failed to place a left elbow extension brace on Resident #67 to prevent further contractures. Findings: Review of policy: Anticoagulants Purpose: This facility recognizes that some medications, including anticoagulants, are associated with greater risks of adverse consequences than other medications. This policy addresses the facility's collaborative, systematic approach to managing anticoagulant therapy for efficacy and safety. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: .3. The resident's plan of care shall alert staff to monitor for adverse consequences. 1.Review of Resident #45's electronic clinical record revealed an admit date of 05/22/2019 with diagnoses that included Hypertension, Schizoaffective Disorder Bipolar Type,…

    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 · E2023-08-02 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a charge nurse other than the DON (Director of Nursing) when the facility had an average daily census of greater than 60 residents. This had the potential to affect a current census of 91 residents. Findings: Review of facility assessment, dated 07/27/2023, revealed in part . 1.2 Indicate your daily average census (enter a range): 92. Review of timesheets revealed: -S3RNAIT (Registered Nurse) (Administrator in Training) clocked in as the DON and functioned as the charge nurse on the following dates: 06/06/2023, 06/07/2023, 06/08/2023, 06/09/2023, 06/12/2023, 06/13/2023, 06/14/2023, 06/15/2023, 06/16/2023, 06/19/2023, 06/20/2023, 06/21/2023, 06/22/2023, and 06/23/2023. -S4DON clocked in as the DON and functioned as the charge nurse on the following dates: 07/17/2023, 07/18/2023, 07/19/2023, 07/20/2023, 07/24/2023, 07/25/2023, 07/26/2023, and 07/27/2023. On 08/02/2023 at 9:01 a.m., an interview was conducted with S4DON, S1ADM, and S3RNAIT. S4DON stated she started 06/26/2023 as the full time DON. S1ADM stated S3RNAIT…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-08-02 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — pattern
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure its medication rate was not 5 percent or greater as evidenced by a calculated medication error rate of 18.75 percent. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled Medications- Administering read in part .3. Medications must be administered in accordance with the orders, including any required time frame. 4. Medications must be administered within one (1) hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified. On 08/02/2023 at 8:19 a.m., S6LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) was observed as she administered medications. Resident #76 Resident #76 was admitted to the facility on 0 2/13/2023 with diagnoses in part: Heart Failure, Hypertension, and Coronary Artery Disease. 08/02/2023 at 8:20 a.m., an observation was made of S6LPN administering the following medication to Resident #76 that was due at 7:00 a.m.: -Carvedilol 12.5 mg (milligram) tablet - 1 tablet by mouth twice daily On 08/02/23 8:22 a.m , an interview was conducted with…

    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 · D2023-08-02 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure quality of care in accordance with professional standards of practice, for 1(#6) of 35 sampled residents. This was evidenced when 72 hours of neuro-checks were not completed after Resident #6 had an unwitnessed fall and hit her head. Findings: A review of the facility's policy titled, Head Injuries read in part: 1. Residents who have sustained a head injury will be monitored according to current standards of nursing practice. 2. When a resident sustains a head injury, he or she will be assessed by a licensed nurse according to the following schedule as a minimum: -Every 15 minutes for 1 hour -Every 30 minutes for 1 hour -Every hour for 4 hours -Every 4 hours for the next 20 hours -Every 8 hours for the next 24 hours -And once 24 hours later . Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses: Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Malignant Neoplasm of Right Main Bronchus, Other Deficiency Anemias, Diabetes Mellitus, Personal History 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    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, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide respiratory care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the facility's policies and procedures evidenced by: 1. failing to follow the physician's order and care plan for oxygen administration for 2 (#6, #22) of 2 residents investigated for oxygen therapy and 2. failing to assure the resident had a portable supply of oxygen to take along when outside the room/ambulating on the unit for Resident #22. Findings: Review of the facility's policy Oxygen Administration revealed in part: Review the physician's orders or facility protocol for oxygen administration. Review the resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident .Equipment and Supplies 1. portable oxygen cylinder (strapped to the stand); .No smoking/oxygen in use signs .Place an oxygen in use sign in a designated place on or over the resident's bed. Adjust the oxygen delivery device so that it is the proper flow of oxygen being administered.…

    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
BREAUX, ALICEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST17%since 02/18/1981
BREAUX, BERTONIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 06/07/2018
BREAUX, BRANDONIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL6%since 05/01/2024
BREAUX, BRYCEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 06/07/2018
FREDERICK, GAYNELIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST17%since 10/15/2019
GASPARD, CELENAIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST17%since 10/15/2019
HATHAWAY, CAMILLEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 02/12/2012
LATOUR, ANNIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 02/18/2013
LATOUR, ELIZABETH DIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST17%since 05/01/2013
LATOUR, THOMASIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 02/12/2012
NOBLE HEALTH MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner 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.

$9.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+16.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 83%Medicare 7%Other / private 9%

About 83% 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.

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

$226per resident / day
operating cost
$6,856per 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 195442. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-10, 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