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

The Oaks Care Center

50 Pinecrest Drive, Pineville, LA 71360 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 136 certified beds · (318) 640-9656 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (318) 640-9656 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0602) — cited Aug 2023
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Aug 2023
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • about 23% 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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
3200 Monroe Hwy · (318) 640-3737 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens<0.1 mi
3400 Military Hwy · (318) 640-8066 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3636 Monroe Hwy · (318) 955-0787 · Call to confirm hours
Park
2202 Military Highway · (318) 640-1400 · Typically dawn to dusk

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
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 1 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased13.4%17.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.2%5.2%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.2%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.6%2.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.3%2.3%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.6%3.5%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.5%17.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication31.0%23.2%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.9%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.2%5.6%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.0%15.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.3%22.7%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%3.1%1.4%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine90.2%76.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.3%28.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit18.6%14.8%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days3.352.561.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.202.741.80worse

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.

37.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 86 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

37.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
31.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
not reportedno hours filed
Therapy hours / resident / day

Met the expected recovery: 31.6% 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 38 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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 SNF37.2%CMS range 29.5–47.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.7%CMS range 7.1–15.110.7%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 discharge31.6%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 discharge36.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge26.3%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 identified92.2%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 setting97.7%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.0%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 worsened2.0%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 hospitalization9.8%CMS range 6.2–15.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.021.02Oct 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

0.17
RN hours/ resident / day
1.19
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.89
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.25
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.22
RN hoursweekends
49.5%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 136 beds and averages 106.3 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 30 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 3.25 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.17 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.89 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 3.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.33 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.15 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-07)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-18)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-07 · 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development of communicable diseases and infection by failing to ensure staff sanitized reusable medical equipment between each resident use, and performed hand hygiene after direct resident contact. Findings: Review of facility policy on 01/06/2026 at 1:30 p.m. titled Hand Hygiene Policy and Procedure dated 07/01/2020 revealed in part.Policy: Hand Hygiene shall be performed: (3) Before and after direct resident contact for which hand hygiene is indicated by acceptable professional practice. (12) Before as appropriate and after coming in contact with a resident's intact skin (e.g. when taking a pulse, blood pressure, and lifting a resident). Observation of medication administration on 01/06/2026 from 8:20 a.m. until 8:45 a.m. revealed S3LPN used a wrist blood pressure cuff to monitor the blood pressure of multiple residents. Observation revealed the blood pressure cuff…

    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 · D2026-01-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident consistent with the resident's rights for 2 (Resident #10 and Resident#12) of 20 Sampled Residents. The facility failed to: 1. Develop a focus of weight loss for Resident #10; and2. Develop a focus of depression for Resident # 12. Findings: Resident #10 Review of Resident #10's electronic health record revealed an admission date of 08/21/2020 with diagnoses which included: Alzheimer's disease, Schizoaffective Disorder, Dementia, Anxiety, Severe Intellectual Disabilities, Chronic Kidney Disease, Unspecified Severe Protein-Calorie Malnutrition, Dysphagia, and Vitamin Deficiency. Review of Resident #10's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 11/04/2025 revealed that a BIMS was not conducted due to Resident #10 being rarely/never understood. Resident #10 was dependent on staff for all ADLs. Review of Resident #10's weight record revealed the following which represented a significant weight loss: 06/06/2025: 102.1 lbs. 07/08/2025: 98.8 lbs.…

    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 · Dcited before2026-01-07 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    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 observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide care and services that met professional standards of quality by failing to ensure Physician's Orders were implemented. Total sample size was 20. Findings:Review of Resident #73's electronic health record revealed an admission date of 01/03/2017 with diagnoses which included: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Mild Protein-Calorie Malnutrition, Generalized Osteoarthritis, Mild Cognitive Impairment, Dementia, Gout, and Encounter for Prophylactic Measures. Review of Resident #73's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 10/09/2025 revealed a BIMS score of 1 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Resident #73 had bilateral upper extremity functional limitations in range of motion. Review of Resident #73's Physician's Order dated 08/04/2025 revealed in part. rolled gauze or hand roll to right hand every shift. Multiple observations of Resident #73 revealed that no rolled gauze or hand roll was present in Resident #73's hand. Observations occurred on the following dates and times:01/05/2026 at 1:30 p.m.01/06/2026…

    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 · Ecited before2024-09-18 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure services were provided to residents according to accepted standards of clinical practice for 2 (Resident #97 and Resident #102) out of a total sample of 30 residents. The facility failed to notify the physician when: 1. Resident #102 had blood glucose levels greater than 451 mg/dL as ordered. 2. Resident #97 had an unwitnessed fall. Findings: Review of a facility policy titled Change in Condition Policy and Procedure dated 08/27/2018 revealed in part . Procedure: 2. The licensed nurse will assess the resident and note any signs and symptoms, including physical and mental changes in condition. Assessment may include but is not limited to: physical assessment findings, vital signs, blood glucose, oxygen saturation, etc. The licensed nurse will document assessment findings in the electronic medical record. 3. The resident's primary physician or designated alternate will be contacted promptly of a significant change in the resident's status. a. If unable to contact primary physician or designated alternate, the medical…

    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 · Ecited before2024-09-18 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    FACILITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure menus were followed in order to meet the nutritional needs of residents who required a puree diet. The facility failed to follow the recipe in regard to ingredients and portion size to ensure the nutritional adequacy of the meal for all 9 residents who received a puree diet. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled: Preparation and Service of Pureed Diets read in part .Procedure 5: Follow recipes provided .Procedure: 6.A food thickener may be added to pureed foods to thicken the food to its desired consistency. In an interview during the initial kitchen tour at 8:43 a.m. on 09/16/2024, S3 Dietary Manager stated the facility had 9 residents being served a puree diet. In an observation on 09/16/2024 at 9:13 a.m., S4 Dietary [NAME] prepared puree pot roast and placed ½ of a roast in the blender with 6 pieces of bread, and approximately 1/2 pan of water in the blender to puree the roast. In an observation at 9:20 a.m., S4 Dietary [NAME] added 3 small cartons of whole milk to the 40 yam patties she placed…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-18 · 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, record review, and interview the facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program and ensure staff practices were consistent with current infection control principles and practices to prevent possible cross contamination for 1 (#109) of 30 sampled residents. The facility failed to implement appropriate infection control precautions for Resident #109. Findings: Review of the facility's policy and procedure dated 04/01/2024, and titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions read in part . Policy: To follow CMS guidelines related to Enhanced Barrier Precautions, Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) refer to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities. Procedure: 1. EBP are indicated for residents with any of the following: b. Wounds and/or indwelling medical devices even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with an MDRO. i. Wounds generally include chronic wounds, not short-lasting…

    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 · E2023-08-24 · tag F0640 — pattern
    Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to transmit a MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment within 14 days of completion for 4 (Resident #4, Resident #15, Resident #63, and Resident #70 ) of 4 sampled residents with MDS record over 120 days old. Findings: Review of the facility MDS transmission reports for Resident #4, Resident #15, Resident #63, and Resident #70 revealed the MDS Assessments with ARD of 07/18/2023 for all the above residents had not been transmitted until 08/17/2023. Interview on 08/23/2023 at 11:10 a.m. with S11 LPN/MDS Team Leader and S12 LPN/MDS Coordinator confirmed the above findings. S11 LPN/MDS Team Leader and S12 LPN/MDS Coordinator denied any technological issues that may have hindered transmission of the noted assessments. S11 LPN/MDS Team Leader revealed assessments should have been transmitted within 14 days of completion and had not been.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-24 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain dignity for 1 (Resident #19) of 36 sampled residents by failing to ensure she was free of facial hair. Findings: Review of Resident #19's medical records revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: Hyperlipidemia, Unspecified Mood disorder, Athsclerotic Heart Disease, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Essential Hypertension, Unspecified Dementia, Alzheimer's disease and Anxiety Disorder. Review of Resident #19's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 05/19/2023 revealed a BIMS score of 14 (indicating intact cognition). Resident #19 required physical assistance with 1-person physical assist for bed mobility, personal hygiene, bathing and toilet use. An interview and Observation on 08/21/2023 at 10:52 a.m. revealed Resident #19 sitting in dining room waiting for lunch with long facial hair on her chin and lip. Interview with Resident #19 revealed that she would like for her face to be shaved. An Observation and…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-24 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review the Facility failed to promote and facilitate residents' self- determination through support of the residents' choice about aspects of his or her life in the facility that were significant to the resident for 1 (Resident #47) of 31 sampled Residents. The facility failed to provide a diet according to Resident #47''s food preferences. Findings: Review of Resident #47's medical record revealed an admit date of 11/04/2020 with diagnoses which included: Morbid Obesity, Functional Dyspepsia, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Atherosclerosis of Native Coronary Arteries and Bilateral Amputee. Review of a Quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD of 07/25/2023 revealed Resident #47 had a BIMS score of 15 indicating intact cognition. Review of August 2023 Physician orders revealed Resident #47 was on a regular no added salt, no red meats and no fried foods diet. Review of Resident #47's dietary card revealed a regular no added salt diet with dislikes of: cream corn, pork roast, mashed potatoes, pork ham, pork chop, pulled pork, cheese, scallop potatoes…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-24 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview the facility failed to maintain a clean, comfortable and homelike environment, by failing to ensure the bathroom wall and door in Room A were in good repair. Findings: Observation on 08/21/2023 at 12:38 p.m. of the resident bathroom in Room A revealed several small holes in the wall near the commode with 2 exposed screws underneath the grab bar. Observation of the inside of the bathroom door revealed the door appeared shredded across the middle. Observation on 08/24/2023 at 10:30 a.m. of the resident bathroom in Room A revealed several small holes in the wall near the commode with 2 exposed screws underneath the grab bar. The inside of the bathroom door appeared shredded across the middle of the door. Observation of Room A bathroom on 08/24/2023 accompanied by S2 DON revealed the above concerns remained present. Interview at the time of observation confirmed the door was peeling and damaged across the middle and lower corners. Two exposed screws were present below the wall grab bar and several small holes were present in the wall beside the…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-24 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
    Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
    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 a resident was free from misappropriation of property for 1 (Resident #81) of 1 resident sampled for misappropriation, in a total sample of 36 residents. The facility failed to prevent misappropriation of Resident #81's funds by S10 CNA. Findings: Review of the facility abuse policy revealed in part . Each resident has the right to be free from abuse, corporal punishment, and involuntary seclusion. No one shall abuse a resident. This policy applies to facility staff, other residents, family members or resident representatives, and anyone else present in our facility. 7. Misappropriation of Resident Property means the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful, temporary, or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the residents consent. Review of Resident #81's clinical record revealed an admit date of 08/01/2022 with diagnoses that included Syringomyelia, Syringobulbia, Paraplegia, Neuromuscular Dysfunction of Bladder, and Pressure Ulcer of Left Buttock. Review of Resident #81's Quarterly…

    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 · D2023-08-24 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards for 2 (Resident #46 and Resident #211) of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to: 1. Provide humidification in accordance to the resident person centered plan of care 2. Ensure respiratory equipment was properly stored Findings: Resident #46 Review of Resident #46's medical records revealed a diagnoses of Chronic Congestive Heart Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Heart Failure, and Anxiety Disorder. Review of Resident #46's care plan with a review date of 09/27/2023 revealed Resident# 46 required oxygen therapy due to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with facility interventions to provide humidification to oxygen therapy. An interview on 08/21/2023 at 11:30 a.m. with Resident #46 revealed she requested the facility add humidification to her oxygen concentrator multiple times because her nose became dry and irritated with oxygen usage without humidification. Resident #46 stated someone notified her…

    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 · Dcited before2023-08-24 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to meet the nutritional needs of residents in accordance with established national guidelines. The facility failed to follow the menu in regard to portion size to ensure nutritional adequacy of the meal for all 113 Residents who receive meals prepared by the facility kitchen. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled: Standardized Recipes read in part . Standardized recipes are used in preparation of food for control of quality, quantity, and uniformity of product. 2. A standardized recipe includes the following information: Yield and portion size. Review of the facility's policy titled: Portion Control read in part . Menus shall reflect standardized portion sizes to ensure nutritional adequacy of the diets, control production, and enhance food cost control efforts. 1. The established portion sizes for specific menu items are listed on the posted menu modification. 3. Employees are expected to follow established portions size for all menu items unless otherwise altered for nutrition care purposes or…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-24 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This deficient practice had the potential to affect the 113 residents that received meals prepared by the kitchen. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled: Cleaning and Sanitizing Equipment read in part . All equipment is kept clean and food contact surfaces are cleaned and sanitized. Observation of the facility's kitchen on 08/21/2023 at 8:25 a.m. accompanied by S3 Dietary Manager revealed: The kitchen's microwave was unsanitary with dried food splattered on the top and bottom. The dry food storage area contained 1 carton of thickened cranberry juice that had an expiration date of 07/28/2023 on the shelf for use. Interview with S3 Dietary Manager on 08/21/2023 at 8:35 a.m. confirmed the above findings. S3 Dietary Manager stated the microwave needed to be cleaned, and the shelf should not contain any expired items.

    Nutrition and Dietary 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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PLANTATION MANAGEMENT COMPANY — 16 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 51.8+2.2 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 52.6+2.4 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 51.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 51.9+0.1 vs chain
The other 15 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.8★, 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
QSST TRUST FOR GENE OLIVER QUIRK IIIOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST16%since 01/01/2021
QSST TRUST FOR MARSHALL TODD QUIRKOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST16%since 01/01/2021
QSST TRUST FOR SCOTT HOLDEN QUIRKOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST16%since 01/01/2021
QUIRK, CYNTHIAIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR36%since 01/01/2021
QUIRK, GENEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR16%since 01/01/2021
DAVID, LORAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2019
MAXWELL, PHILLIPIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 09/07/2016
DELATTE, KIMBERLYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/31/2001
QUIRK, SCOTTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/31/2001

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$9.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-6.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.4M
Related-party expense23% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 80%Medicare 6%Other / private 14%

About 80% 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 $2.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$256per resident / day
operating cost
$7,786per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$240per 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 195529. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-07, 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