Bayou Chateau Nursing Center

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

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.

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.

Met the expected recovery: 42.9% 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 21 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

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

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 104 beds and averages 53.1 residents a day — about 51% occupied, or roughly 51 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.19 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.16 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.83 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 3.43 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.50 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.16 to 0.15 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% 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

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.

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.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  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 follow infection control practices to prevent the development and transmission of infection. The facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 (#1, #2, #3) sampled residents.Findings:Review on 01/06/2026 of the facility's policy and procedure dated 04/15/2025, and titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions read in part. It is the policy of this facility to implement enhanced barrier precautions for the prevention of transmission of multi-resistant organisms. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. Prompt recognition of need: a. All staff receive training on enhanced barrier precautions upon hire and at least annually and are expected to comply with all designated precautions. 2. Initiation of Enhanced Barrier Precautions: b. Enhanced barrier precautions will be implemented for residents with any of the following: i. indwelling medical devices (feeding tubes) even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a MDRO. 4. High-contact resident care activities…

  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 · E2025-09-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored appropriately based on current acceptable professional principles. The Facility failed to ensure: 1. Expired medications were not available for administration to residents for 1 (med cart A) of 3 (med cart A, med cart B, and med cart C) medication carts observed. 2. Medications and wound care products were labeled with the date it was opened for 1 (med cart B) of 3 (med cart A, med cart B, and med cart C) medication carts observed. 3. Medications were stored in a locked compartment and not available to unauthorized staff to access for 1 (med cart B) of 3 (med cart A, med cart B, and med cart C) medication carts observed.This deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 52 residents who resided in the facility.Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled Labeling of Medications and Biologicals with a revised date of 07/21/2021 revealed, in part. Labels for multi-use vials must include:a) The date the vial was initially opened or accessed;b) All opened 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-17 · 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 infections by: 1. Failed to ensure staff sanitized hands between residents, while providing assistance during mealtime. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 12 residents that are fed by staff in the facility, and; 2.Failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions were followed for Resident #5 and Resident #33. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 12 residents that are on EBP. The total sample size was 20. 1. Review of the facility's undated policy titled Dining Room/Meal Time Procedure read in part.Purpose: To ensure residents are provided meals in a timely, organized manner that preserves dignity, promotes adequate nutritional intake while ensuring safety. 3. General Procedure. A. All employee serving meals will wear hair protections and exercise appropriate infection control measures. An…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-09-17 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  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 the resident's right to formulate an advanced directive was properly reflected in the resident's medical record for 1 (Resident #30) of 1 resident reviewed for advanced directives. The facility failed to ensure all medical records regarding advanced directive/code status consistently reflected Resident #30's wishes to be a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate).Review of the facility undated policy titled Advanced Directives read in part. Advanced directives will be respected in accordance with state law and facility policy. 4. Information about whether or not the resident has executed an advanced directive shall be displayed prominently in the medical record. Review of Resident #30's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed an initial admission date of 08/09/2024 with diagnoses that included in part, Hypertensive Heart Disease without Heart Failure, Major Depressive Disorder, Essential (Primary) Hypertension, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus without Complications, and Unspecified Dementia, Mild, with Anxiety.Review of…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-09-17 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents identified with Mental Disorder and/or Intellectual Disability had an accurately completed PASARR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) Level I and/or Level II for 1(#8) of 1 resident reviewed for PASARR screening. Findings: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Resident Assessment-Coordination with PASARR Program read in part .8. Any resident who exhibits a newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition will be referred promptly to the state mental health or intellectual disability authority for a Level II resident review. Review of Resident #8's medical record revealed an admit date on 08/23/2005 with the following diagnoses: Vascular Dementia with Agitation, Major Depression Disorder with Severe with Psychotic Symptoms, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Schizoaffective Disorder (12/10/2018). Review of Resident #8's medical record revealed a Level 1 pre-screening…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-09-17 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolated
  Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview the facility failed to dispose of garbage and refuse properly. This deficient practice had to the potential to affect all 52 residents who resided in the facility according to the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents Form dated 09/15/2025.Findings: Review of the facility policy titled (Facility Name) Disposal of Garbage and Refuse on 09/15/2025 at 1:30 p.m. revealed in part.the facility shall properly dispose of kitchen garbage, and other garbage. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: (7) Surrounding area shall be kept clean so that accumulation of debris and insect/rodent attractions are minimized. Observation of the facility dumpster area on 09/15/2025 at 8:57 a.m. accompanied by S6 Dietary Manager revealed there were 3 shopping carts, a broken chair, and 3 open trash cans with trash and debris not contained. Interview with S6 Dietary Manager at that time confirmed the findings and stated the items should be thrown away.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-07 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  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 ensure 1 (Resident #2) of 4 ( Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, and Resident #4) sampled residents received the necessary treatment and services to prevent and promote the healing of pressure ulcers by failing to perform hand hygiene during treatment of a pressure ulcer.Findings:Review of the facility's undated policy titled Clean Dressing Change read in part.Policy: 3. Each wound will be treated individually. 7. Perform hand hygiene and put on clean gloves. 9. Loosen the tape and remove the existing dressing. 10. Remove gloves, pulling inside out over the dressing if able. Discard. 11. Perform hand hygiene and put on clean gloves. 12. Cleanse wound as ordered. 14. Perform hand hygiene and put on clean gloves. 16. Secure dressing. Review of Resident #4 's medical record revealed an admit date of 05/15/2025 with diagnoses that included: Adult Failure to Thrive, Long Term use of Antibiotics, Anxiety Disorder, Functional Quadriplegic, Encephalopathy, Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Infection,…

  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 · F2024-08-07 · tag F0732 — widespread
  Post nurse staffing information every day.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview the facility failed to post nurse staffing information on a daily basis that included the resident census, and total number and actual hours worked by RNs, LPNs and CNA staff directly responsible for resident care per shift. The facility census was 47. Findings: Observation on 08/05/2024 at 6:03 a.m. revealed a form for daily nursing hours dated 08/01/2024- 08/12/2024 was posted on a bulletin board near the nurse's station. Daily staffing hours were not posted for 08/02/2024, 08/03/2024, 08/04/2024, and 08/05/2024. Interview with S3 RN revealed she was unsure who was responsible for completing and posting the daily nursing hours over the weekend, but that they should be posted daily. Observation on 08/05/2024 at 7:45 a.m. revealed the form for daily nursing hours dated 08/01/2024- 08/12/2024 was not updated and posted to include the required information. Interview on 08/05/2024 at 12:35 p.m. with S1 DON revealed she was responsible for updating and posting the facility's daily nursing hours. S1 DON confirmed no one had updated or posted the daily…

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

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-07 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each 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 a resident received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of needs for 1 (#15) of 2 (#15 and #41) sampled residents reviewed for call bell placement. The facility failed to ensure Resident #15 had a call bell in reach in order to call for assistance. Findings: A review of Facility's undated policy dated 11/27/2023 titled Call Lights: Accessibility and Timely Response, read in part . 6. The call system will be accessible to residents while in their bed or other sleeping accommodations within the resident's room. Review of Resident #15's medical record revealed an admit date of 06/27/2024, with diagnoses that included Microcephaly, Cognitive Communication Deficit, and Muscle Wasting and Atrophy. Review of Resident #15's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an ARD of 07/26/2024, revealed Resident #15 had moderately impaired decision. The MDS revealed Resident #15 required staff assistance for oral hygiene, toileting, bathing, dressing and transferring. Interview on 08/05/2024 at 7:52 a.m. with S4…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-07 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
  Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
  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 ensure ADLs (activities of daily living) were performed for 1 (#40) of 2 (#34 & #40) residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #40 received nail care. Findings: Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admit date of 09/22/2023 with diagnoses that included in part .Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Kidney Disease, Heart Failure, and Major Depressive Disorder. Review of Resident #40's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 05/29/2024 revealed a BIMS score of 12, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of the MDS revealed Resident #40 required supervision or touching assistance with personal hygiene. Review of Resident #40's current care plan revealed Resident #40 requires assistance for all ADLs related to general weakness and impaired cognition. Interventions included give verbal cues to help prompt, break up tasks into smaller steps. Resident requires supervision/cues for personal hygiene. An observation on 08/05/2024 at 7:15 a.m. revealed Resident #40 was noted…

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

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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 74% 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 $246K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

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