Landmark Of Rayne
2021 Crowley Rayne Highway, Rayne, LA 70578 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 130 certified beds · (337) 783-8101 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- 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
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (30) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (70%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
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 | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 2 to 1 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 27.8% | 17.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.7% | 5.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.8% | 1.2% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 6.8% | 2.1% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 15.9% | 2.3% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.8% | 3.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 26.2% | 17.9% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 32.6% | 23.2% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.0% | 94.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.9% | 5.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.9% | 15.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 36.7% | 22.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 3.1% | 1.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 63.0% | 76.3% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.5% | 28.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 3.9% | 14.8% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.22 | 2.56 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.07 | 2.74 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
43.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 33 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 22.6% 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 31 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 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 27% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 43.5%CMS range 28.3–60.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.7%CMS range 7.8–17.4 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 22.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 22.6% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 25.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 72.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | not 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 discharge | not 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 stay | 2.3% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 9.0%CMS range 5.3–15.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.09 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 130 beds and averages 100.4 residents a day — about 77% 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 3.98 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.33 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.93 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.41 on weekdays — 34% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.14 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 70% is well above 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
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.
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.
30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-05-13 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain accurate medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices when staff failed to immediately sign out narcotic medications on the narcotic record form at the time they were administered for the for 5 residents (#23, #29, #71, #76 and #77). Findings: A review of the facility's policy titled Drug- Controlled Substances with a last review date of 01/29/2026, read in part, Regulation requires that the community has a system in place to account for the receipt, usage, disposition, and reconciliation of all controlled medications. These systems include the following: Controlled medications are to be signed out on the Individual Resident Narcotics Record (Form NS-618) at the time they are administered. Review of Resident #23's physician orders revealed an order dated 04/17/2024 for Acetaminophen w/ Codeine Tab (Tablet) 300-30 MG (milligrams), Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to other chronic pain. Review or Resident #23's MAR (Medication Administration Record)…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-13 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interview, the facility failed to accurately assess 1 (#27) of 3 residents investigated for dental out of 55 sampled residents.Findings:Record review revealed Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to, schizophrenia, depression, bipolar, type 2 diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and obesity. Her Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15, indicating she was cognitively intact.On 05/11/2026 at 1:03 p.m., an observation of Resident#27's oral cavity revealed she had one decayed tooth on the top front and one decayed tooth on the bottom front. The rest of her teeth were broken and decayed at the gums. At this time, the resident stated her teeth were in this condition when she was admitted on [DATE].Record review of section L. Dental Status of Resident #27's admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] read in part:D. Obvious or likely cavity or broken natural teeth was not checked.E.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to implement a person-centered care plan for 1 (#6) of 55 sampled residents.Findings:Record review of Resident #6's electronic record revealed she was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis not limited to dementia, traumatic subdural hemorrhage, encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease-Stage 3, dysphagia, and depression, and bowel and bladder incontinence. Her brief interview of mental status score was 5, indicating severely impaired cognition. The resident's responsible party was identified as her daughter.Record review Resident #6's care plan dated 08/01/2024 read in part, The resident has bladder incontinence. Under task description read in part, Staff do not use perineal-wash on this resident due to sensitivity.On 05/11/2026 at 10:00 a.m. an observation revealed Resident #6 was lying in bed grimacing and holding her perineal area. The resident stated her private area was irritated and was aggravated to the point she could not tolerate it.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was assessed as an unsafe smoker received adequate supervision while smoking for 1 (#24) out of 3 (#2, #11, #24) residents investigated for accidents. Findings:Review of the policy with a review date of 01/29/2026, titled Smoking Policies and Regulations read in part, residents identified as needing supervision shall have designated staff or approved visitors assist them while smoking.Review of Resident #24's electronic medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, but were not limited to, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following non traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage affecting right dominant side, alcohol abuse with unspecified alcohol induced disorder, other psychoactive substance abuse with psychoactive substance induced psychotic disorder with delusions, and cognitive communication deficit.Review of Resident #24's modified significant change MDS (Minimum Data Set)…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-13 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5%. A total of 25 opportunities were observed with 2 medication errors which resulted in a medication error rate of 8.00%. The facility failed to: 1. Administer Resident #38's Budesonide per manufacturer's instructions. 2. Administer Resident #98's Cholecalciferol per physician's ordersFindings:A review of the facility's policy titled Administration of Medications which was last reviewed on 01/29/2026, read in part, Purpose: To administer medications in accordance with best practice; Oral Medication Administration Procedure: 3. Verify the physician order, comparing the medication label to the MAR (Medication Administration Record) to verify the following: a. Right Medication, b. Right dosage, c. Right route, d. Right time, e. Right resident.Resident #38Review of Resident #38's health record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the nurse performed hand hygiene and changed gloves while administering wound care treatments for 1 resident (#17) out of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcer/injury out of a final sample of 55 residents.Findings:Review of the facility's policy titled Dressing Change Police and Procedure, with a last reviewed date of 01/29/2026, revealed in part: Steps in the procedure.11. Remove dressing. Pull gloves over dressing and discard.12. Perform hand hygiene. Put on disposable gloves. 13. Irrigate/cleanse the skin area as ordered.16. Perform hand hygiene. Apply disposable gloves.18. Dress the area with the prescribed dressing, date and initial the dressing.Review of Resident #17's Electronic Health Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included in part, Hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, pressure ulcer of left buttock, stage 2, and pressure ulcer of right buttock,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-16 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's comprehensive care plan was revised for 1 (Resident #2) out of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) sampled residents. The facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan was updated to include accurate advance directive code status for Resident #2. Findings:A review of the facility's policy titled Care Plan Process with a review date of [DATE], read in part: Baseline Care Plan and Summary: The care plan must be reviewed and revised periodically, on an ongoing basis to reflect the services provided or arranged, and must be consistent with each resident's written plan of care. A review of the facility's policy titled Advance Directives with a review date of [DATE], read in part: Purpose: To support the implementation of the Patient Self-Determination Act within the framework of state and federal law and facility policies. All staff providing care for the resident will review the Advance Directive and clarify any…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2025-04-09 · tag F0636 — widespreadAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed using the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) process within regulatory timeframes for 17 (#3, #10, #14, #15, #18, #20, #27, #28, #36, #37, #46, #61, #66, #67, #82, #89, #307) out of 24 (#3, #9, #10, #14, #15, #18, #20, #27, #28, #36, #37, #46, #52, #61, #66, #67, #68, #74, #82, #83, #89, #90, #95, #307) total residents reviewed for assessments. Findings: Review of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) RAI Version 3.0 Manual- RAI Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA)-required Assessment Summary revealed that Assessment Reference Date (ARD) for Resident Assessments should be completed no later than the 14th calendar day of the resident's ARD. The following Resident records were reviewed on 04/07/2025 . Review of Resident #3's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed a quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD of 02/14/2025 and a required completion date of 02/28/2025. Continued review of Resident #3's EHR revealed a discharge MDS assessment with an ARD 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.
- Potential for harm · F2025-04-09 · tag F0640 — widespreadEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the provider failed to transmit a completed Discharge MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessments within 14 days after completion for 7 (#9, #52, #68, #74, #83, #90, #95) out of 24 (#3, #9, #10, #14, #15, #18, #20, #27, #28, #36, #37, #46, #52, #61, #66, #67, #68, #74, #82, #83, #89, #90, #95, #307) resident's investigated for resident assessments. Findings: Review of Resident #9's electronic clinical record revealed a quarterly MDS assessment, with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 01/28/2025, was completed on 01/31/2025. Review of the facility's CMS (Center for Medicare Services) transmittal validation report indicated Resident #9's quarterly MDS assessment with the ARD of 01/28/2025 was transmitted on 04/07/2025 and was more than 14 days late. Review of Resident #52's electronic clinical record revealed a quarterly MDS assessment, with an ARD of 01/25/2025, was completed on 01/28/2025. Review of the facility's CMS transmittal validation report indicated Resident #52's quarterly MDS assessment with the ARD of 01/25/2025 was transmitted 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-09 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure 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 ensure residents received food in the amount required to meet nutritional needs of residents by failing to use the appropriate serving sizes as indicated by the diet spreadsheet. This deficient practice had the potential to affect the 21 residents residing on the secured unit. Findings: Review of the diet spreadsheet for 04/07/2025 revealed dietary staff was required to serve the following: 7 oz (ounces) of ham and beans and 1/2 cup of greens for residents who received regular and mechanical soft diets, and 2 #8 scoops of pureed ham and beans for residents who received pureed diets. On 04/07/2025 at 11:00 A.M., an observation was made of the kitchen staff while they served lunch. Observations were then made of dietary staff as they prepared meal trays for the secure unit. S3Dietary placed greens onto the residents' plates using a 1/3 cup sized scoop. S8Dietary proceeded to prepare meal trays using a 6 oz scoop for the regular ham and beans. S2DM confirmed the staff were using the incorrect scoop sizes for 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.
Show the remaining 20 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment, and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections as evidenced by failing to esnure: 1. S6TXN (Treatment Nurse) wore proper PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) while providing wound care to Resident #11, and S10CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) wore proper PPE while providing care to Resident #83 who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions; 2. S6TXN appropriately removed and discarded soiled PPE; after completing wound care. This deficient practice had the potential to affect a census of 96 residents. Findings: Review of facility policy and procedure titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) with a review date of 01/29/25, read in part .enhanced barrier precautions require the use of gown and gloves only for high-contact resident care activities. The following…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the State Long Term care Ombudsman of facility-initiated transfer for 1 (#7) resident in a final sample size of 33. The deficient practice has the potential to affect a census of 96. Findings: Review of Resident #7's electronic health record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, epilepsy, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, urinary tract infection, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of Resident #7's nurse's notes revealed on 12/13/2024 at 1:20 p.m., the resident was transferred to the hospital. Further review of the nurse's notes revealed that on 12/15/2024 at 2:20 p.m., the resident returned from the hospital back to the facility. Review of Resident #7's nurse's notes revealed on 12/24/2024 at 8:15 a.m., the resident was transferred to the hospital. Further review of the nurse's notes revealed that on 12/24/2024 at 1:02 p.m.,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-09 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 accurately code the resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for restraint use for 1 (#28) of 33 sampled residents whose records were reviewed. Findings: Review of Resident #28's electronic health record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, diabetes mellitus, acquired absence of right leg below knee and acquired absence of other left toes. A review of Resident #28's December 2024 Physician's Orders revealed no order for a restraint. Further review of resident #28's medical record revealed an Annual MDS assessment with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 12/12/2024, which read in part . Section P. Restraints and Alarms .Used in Chair or Out of Bed .Trunk restraints .were indicated. On 04/09/2025 at 4:29 p.m., an interview and record review was conducted with S5MDS who confirmed Resident #28 did not have an order for a restraint. She reviewed the referenced MDS, and confirmed 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 review and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive centered care plan for a Level II PASRR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) for 1 (Resident #47) out of 33 sampled residents. This deficient practice had the potential to affect a census of 96. Findings: Review of Resident #47's medical record revealed she was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis that included, but not limited to, Schizoaffective Disorder, Depressive Type. Review of Resident #47's Notice of Medical Certification dated 08/28/2024 read in part, Section II. H. Approved for admission by Level II Authority for a temporary period effective 09/07/2024 through 09/06/2025. Review of OBH-PASRR (Office of Behavioral Health-Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) Evaluation Summary and Determination Notice Evaluation and Placement Recommendations read in part, the individual has a serious mental illness and is recommended nursing home admission. Review of Resident #47's comprehensive person-centered care plan…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-09 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was invited to the resident's care planning meetings for 1 (Resident #54) out of a sample of 33 residents. This deficient practice had the potential to affect a census of 96. Findings: A review of the facility's policy titled Care Plan Process with a review date of 01/29/2025, read in part: Baseline Care Plan and Summary: The facility must provide the resident and the resident representative, if applicable, with a written summary of the baseline care plan by completion of the comprehensive care plan. Step 3: Obtain and consider input from resident and/or family/resident's representative regarding the care area. The IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) will minimally include in part the resident and the resident's representative. If the participation of the resident and their representative is determined to be not practicable for the development of the resident's care plan, and explanation shall be included in the resident's 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.
- Potential for harm · F2025-03-12 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program failed to measure its success and track performance after identifying an area of improvement as evidenced by failing to have documented evidence of monitoring the effectiveness of the proposed plan of action. This deficient practice had the potential to affect a census of 98 residents. Findings: Review of the facility's form titled, Corrective Action Plan, dated 02/12/2025 revealed: 1. Problem Identified: Tasks not firing correctly due to facility changed from 12 hour shifts to 8 hour shifts. 12 hour shifts continued to fire to tasks in addition to 8 hours. Several time code discrepancies resulted in facility wide tasks audit to make corrections. 2. Plan of Action: Immediate action of Task audits of each resident correcting each task time code. Audit of Every individual task for each resident audited and corrected. Nursing staff were in-serviced on task time codes (8 hours) and correct body audit schedules must be verified on each new admit and hospital…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-03-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — patternProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 interview, the facility failed to ensure that residents received the necessary treatment consistent with professional standards of practice to identify, prevent and promote the healing of a pressure area for 2 residents (#2 and #3) out of a total of 6 (#1, #2, #3, #R4, #R5 and #R6) sampled residents. This deficient practice was evidenced by the facility staff failing to: 1. Conduct weekly body audits for Resident #3; 2. Identify a Stage 2 Pressure Ulcer for Resident #3; and 3. Provide ordered treatments for Resident #2. Findings: A review of the facility's policy titled, Weekly Body Audit, with a latest review date of 08/2021 revealed, in part: To be completed weekly for all residents to identify any new alterations in skin integrity. On a designated day of the week, per facility schedule as developed by the DON (Director of Nursing), a body audit will be performed. The Licensed Nurse completes a head to toe inspection of the skin with notation of no new problem or new…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service and failed to ensure sanitary conditions were maintained in the kitchen by failing to: 1. Discard expired foods from the kitchen refrigerator, freezer, and dry storage area; 2. Label opened foods with the date they were opened; 3. Remove compromised cans from the dry storage area; 4. Clean the inside of oven and outside of refrigerator and freezer; and 5. Ensure staff wore hair restraints in the kitchen. This deficient practice had the potential to affect the 92 residents who consumed food from the kitchen from a census of 93 Residents., Findings: On 03/18/2024 at 3:00 p.m., a review was conducted of the facility's policy titled, Storage of Refrigerated Food with a revision date of 01/25/2024. This Policy read in part, The facility ensures the quality and safety of refrigerated foods through accepted storage practices. Procedure .5. All non-hazardous, opened foods are labeled with name of food, date stored .11. Food shall be stored base 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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-20 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards as evidenced by: 1.Failing to ensure oxygen equipment was stored appropriately when not in use for Resident #5 and Resident #68; 2.Failing to ensure oxygen equipment was changed for Resident #53, Resident #68, and Resident #80; 3.Failing to ensure oxygen equipment was properly dated for resident #80. Findings: On 03/19/2024, a review of the facility's policy titled Infection Control Oxygen Equipment Cleaning with a last reviewed date of 01/25/2024 read in part . 5. Pre-filled humidifiers are to be dated .6. Refillable humidifiers should be washed and refilled every 72 hours with distilled or sterile water and dated. 7. Tubing should be replaced every 7 days. 8. Masks should be replaced every 7 days. 9. Cannulas should be replaced every 7 days. 10. When not in use, store the mask/cannula in a plastic bag clearly labeled with the resident's name and date. Resident #5 Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-20 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure that menus met the nutritional needs of residents according to established guidelines, as evidenced by the kitchen staff failing to have knowledge of recipes to be followed when preparing pureed foods. This deficient practice had the potential to contribute to decreased intake, altered nutritional needs, and weight loss for the 9 residents who consumed pureed diets. 92 residents consumed foods from the kitchen. Findings: On 03/18/2024 at 9:50 a.m., an observation of the pureed procedure was conducted. S12Diet (Dietary) scooped 5 large unmeasured cooking spoons of macaroni noodles into the food processor, and used the same spoon to scoop 2 large spoons of melted cheese. S12Diet poured water from a large pitcher into the food processor without measuring, then poured an unmeasured portion of a white powder from a cup on the counter into the food processor. She turned the food processor on, then stopped and poured more water and white powder in the food processor and blended again. On 03/18/2024 at 9:55 a.m., an interview…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-20 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolatedHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, and policy and procedure reviews the facility failed to ensure resident rights by not acting promptly upon resident grievances received during monthly resident council meetings and demonstrate the facility's response for such grievances in the facility. Findings: On 03/21/2024, a review of the facility's policy, Resident Council, with a last reviewed date of 01/25/2024, revealed in part, the following, Policy: A Resident Council will be organized within the facility with regularly scheduled meetings (at least quarterly). If a formal Resident Council cannot be established within the facility, an alternate process is established . Purpose: To provide a forum for residents to share in the governance of the facility by providing opinions, suggestions, and problem solving in relation to areas of concern or community issues. Procedures: . 8. The facility must consider the views of the group and act promptly upon recommendations regarding issues of resident care and life in the facility. The Grievances-Residents process shall be followed. The grievance…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-20 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary physical restraints for 1 (#76) resident out of 2 (#75, #76) residents investigated for physical restraints. Findings: On 03/20/2024, a review of the facility's policy titled Restraints and Safety Devices with a last reviewed date of 01/25/2024 read in part .The use of a restraint will require a determination of need to be completed by a licensed nurse, a signed consent and a physician's order prior to applying restraints Before a restraint may be use, the following steps must be followed unless it is an emergency situation: 1. Identify reason for symptoms that indicate the need for a restraint. 2. Remove, if possible, the causes of these symptoms. This may include taking care of special needs, increased rehabilitation and restorative nursing, modifying the environment and increasing supervision .4. Restraints should be used only after practicable alternatives have failed. The least restrictive…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 interview, record review ,and policy review the facility failed to implement the resident's care plan by failing to administer medications per physician's orders for 1 ( #94) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Findings: On 03/20/2024, review of the facility's policy, Drug Administration and Documentation, last reviewed on 01/25/2024, revealed in part, the following . Routine medications must be administered no more than sixty (60) minutes before or after the prescribed time. Review of Resident #94's record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, Malignant Neoplasm Of Colon Unspecified, Neoplasm Related Pain (Acute) (Chronic), Hyperlipidemia, Other Specified Arthritis, Unspecified Site, and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Without Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms. Review of Resident #94's physician orders dated 03/01/2024 revealed: 1. Clarithromycin 500 mg (milligram) tablet give one tablet by mouth twice daily for 12 doses 2. Pravastatin 10…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-20 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene for 1 (#18) out of 2 (#18, #69) residents investigated for ADLs out of a total sample of 30 residents. Findings: On 03/20/2024, a review of the facility's policy titled Activities for Daily Living with a last reviewed date of 01/25/2024 read in part .Procedure .7. CNAs will document completion of resident assignments every shift by marking with their initials or by entering in electronic charting system 9. CNA's will initial indicating completion of assignments for the specific date and shift at the end of the ADLs or enter electronically. Review of the Nursing Assistant-Certified Job Summary read in part .Responsibilities .16. Follows baths and whirlpool schedules as outlined for each resident. Review of Resident #18's EHR (Electronic Health Record) revealed the resident was admitted to the facility 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-20 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were re-evaluated for the continued use of PRN (as needed) antipsychotic medications after 14 days for 1 (#75) resident out of a final sample of 30 residents. Findings: On 03/20/2024, a review of the facility's policy titled Anti-Psychotic-Use of Anti-Psychotics with a last reviewed date of 01/25/2024, read in part .The facility will not use Antipsychotic medications, unless it is necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record. Residents who use antipsychotic drugs will receive gradual dose reductions and behavioral interventions, unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to safely reduce and discontinue these drugs .PRN orders for antipsychotic drugs are limited to 14 days and require the evaluation of the attending physician or prescribing practitioner to renew. Review of Resident #75's electronic health record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interview the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program as evidenced by staff failing to sanitize reusable resident care equipment after use and between residents. The deficient practice had the potential to effect a census of 93. Findings: On 03/19/2024 at 4:30 p.m., a review of the facility's policy titled Infection Control Policy for General Cleaning and Maintenance of Equipment reviewed on 01/25/2024 read in part . It is the policy of this facility that all resident care equipment will be cleaned and decontaminated after use and will be prepared for reuse by the same or another resident. Further review of facility's policy titled Blood Glucose Quality Control reviewed on 01/25/2024 read in part #18. Clean the meter using a disinfectant wipe. Maintenance of Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems, Always clean the meter after each use. Gently wipe and clean surface of the meter with a disinfectant wipe per facility policy. On 03/19/2024 at 8:14 a.m., during medication pass, S9LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) was observed using a tray…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-24 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program by failing to ensure the facility was free from insects and rodents. The deficient practice had the potential to affect 87 residents who resided in the facility. Findings: Review of the facility's policy Pest Control, read in part a pest management program is used to prevent pests from entering . Procedure 1 . c. Gaps and cracks in doorframes and thresholds are sealed with weather stripping . Review of resident #2's Grievance/Complaint form dated 6/29/2023 revealed the resident complained that she had bugs in her room. The summary of pertinent findings or conclusions revealed the fields surrounding the facility were recently cut and the bugs from outside were drawn to the inside light. Insects were entering the door on the hall where the resident resides. The corrective action taken revealed that on 6/29/2023 maintenance sealed the door where the insects were likely coming inside. On 6/30/2023, resident #2 stated the bugs were still coming inside. Review of resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-22 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment as evidenced by the presence of cobwebs, sediment observed on the wall, and stained privacy curtain for 1 (#3) of 6 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5 and R1) sampled residents. Findings: Review of facility's policy titled, Resident Environment, revealed: It is the policy of this facility to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, allowing the resident to use his/her personal belongings to the extent possible. Review of form titled, Housekeeping Hall Job Duties, revealed in part: Task to be completed each shift .Clean spider webs .When cleaning rooms please make sure you are moving everything and cleaning behind them . Review of form titled, Detail Cleaning Checklist, revealed in part .Disinfect corners .Spot clean walls .Conduct final inspection . Review of Resident #3's electronic health record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following pertinent…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that service was provided as outlined in the comprehensive plan of care for 1 (#2) of 6 sampled residents (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and R1) by failing to ensure that weekly body audits were conducted for Resident #2. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled, Weekly Body Audit revealed in part: Policy: To be completed weekly for all residents to identify any new alterations in skin integrity .1. On designated day of the week, per facility schedule as developed by the DON, a body audit will be performed .5. The Licensed nurse completes a head to toe inspection of the skin with notation of no new problem or new problem noted . Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses in part: Pressure Ulcer of Sacral Region, Unspecified Protein-Calorie Nutrition, Spinal Stenosis. A review of the Resident #1's care plan revealed that he had a pressure ulcer, with an intervention for weekly body audits. A review of the resident's July 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents received care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice to meet the highest practicable physical well-being of residents when the facility failed to have the required size of a curved tip urinary catheter available to replace the resident's current catheter when it had become occluded and was causing pain for 1 (#3) of 3 (#2,#3 and #R1) residents with urinary catheters out of a total 6 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5 and #R1) sampled residents. Findings: Review of Resident #3's electronic health record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following pertinent diagnoses: Quadriplegia, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder- Recurrent, Moderate, Neuromuscular Dysfunction of Bladder, Dysuria and Other Specified Rheumatoid Arthritis, Multiple Sites. Review of Resident #3's significant change MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a BIMS…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to THE BEEBE FAMILY — 48 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 3.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 47 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 47; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EXTENDED CARE ASSOCIATES, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 10% | since 10/01/2021 |
| JEFFERSON BOYD AND JOJUANA SUMMIT TR | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 30% | since 10/01/2021 |
| TR FOR THE WHDS GREAT GRANDCHILDREN | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 30% | since 10/01/2021 |
| JOHNSON, TERRY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 30% | since 10/01/2021 |
| ELTON G BEEBE SR REVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 10/21/2021 |
| BEEBE, BOBBY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2010 |
| BEEBE, ELTON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| PARKINSON, TONI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| PATHWAY MANAGEMENT OF LOUISIANA LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| PROVIDER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| TRISTAR REHAB INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| LANCON, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| RAMIREZ ASTACIO, CESAR | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2024 |
| SAINI, SATINDER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| SPEYRER, MELISSA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/18/2022 |
| WILDER, BRIAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| ALISONS 2016 FAM TR NO 2 | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| ARIA CARE MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2022 |
| BEEBE 2013 CHILDRENS TR NG | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| FELICIAS 2016 FAM TR NO 2 | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| LOUISIANA EXTENDED CARE CENTERS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| LTC HIM CONSULTING INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| PHARMACEUTICAL CONSULTING SERVICES OF AMERICA LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2021 |
| QSST TR FOR ALISON BEEBE SADLER DANOS AND HER DESCENDANTS | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| RAYNE HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| VERDIN ENTERPRISES, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 44 rows in the source record cover these 28 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
19 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.
About 78% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $798K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. 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
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
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.
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 195544. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-13, 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.