Home / Louisiana / Franklinton
2000 Main Street, Franklinton, LA 70438 · Washington County · (985) 839-4491
121 certified beds, about 98 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1995
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 195324 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 18, 2026, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Louisiana average is 6.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 25 health citations since October 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $198,912 in the last three years; the largest was $193,667, and the latest is dated October 23, 2023.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.68 hours per resident per day, against 3.76 across Louisiana and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.26 of those hours.
47.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Louisiana average 47.6%).
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 25 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility's binding arbitration agreement failed to explicitly grant the resident or his/her representative the right to rescind the agreement within 30 calendar days of signing it for 3 of 3 (#9, #31, and #102) Residents sampled for signing the facility's binding arbitration on admission. This deficient practice had to the potential to affect the 98 residents residing in the facility. Review of Resident #9's admission records revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and included a signed binding arbitration agreement which revealed it did not explicitly grant the resident or his/her representative the right to rescind the agreement within 30 calendar days of signing it as required. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff accurately implemented the comprehensive care plan requiring a 2-person total body mechanical lift transfer for 1 (#85) of 21 residents reviewed for care plans. Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Lack of Coordination, Dementia, Parkinsons, Repeated Falls, Transient Cerebral Ischemic Attack, Abnormalities of Gait and Mobility, Forms of Tremor, and Muscle Weakness. Review of Resident #85's MDS with an ARD of 12/22/2026 revealed a BIMS of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, on readmission, the facility failed to accurately document a cardiopulmonary resuscitation code status in the resident's clinical record for 1 (#9) out of 3 residents reviewed for readmission clinical records. Review of Resident #9's clinical record revealed she was originally admitted on [DATE] and then readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #9's admission MDS with the ARD of [DATE] revealed she had a BIMs score of 14, which indicated she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #9's physical hard chart revealed a document titled Resident/Family Consent for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation signed and dated [DATE] by Resident #9's representative, S6AD, and physician. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Food was properly labeled in the refrigerators of the facility's kitchen; 2. Food products had not exceeded their expiration date; 3. Safe practices for thawing pork chops; and 4. Liquid pasteurized egg were maintained at a holding temperature of 41 degrees F or below. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 87 residents who were served food and beverages from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident's MDS assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 5 (#19, #27, #46, #73, and #91) out of 19 residents reviewed in the final sample. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Resident #19 was coded accurately for urinary tract infections within the last 30 days; 2. Resident #27 and Resident #46 were accurately coded for PASRR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review); 3. Resident #73 was coded accurately for use of Physical Restraints; and 4. Resident #91 was coded accurately for discharge.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure pain management was provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 (#2) out of 3 (#2, #25, and #88) residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to 1. Administer scheduled narcotics to Resident #2; and 2. Document narcotic administration for Resident #2.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure meals were served at regular times comparable to normal times in the community or in accordance with residents preferences for 2 of 2 (Hall A and Hall B) halls observed for dining.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents' Medication Administration Records (MAR) were accurately documented for 2 (#63 and #66) of 37 ( #2, #4, #7, #10, #11, #13, #18, #19, #20, #22, #25, #27, #29, #37, #38, #44, #46, #48, #49, #58, #61, #63, #66, #71, #73, #76, #83, #85, #88, #91, #92, #93, #244, #245, #344, #345 and #346) residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services. This deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 89 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interview, the facility failed to: 1. Post the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of pertinent state agencies and advocacy groups, such as the State Survey Agency, the State licensure office, the protection and advocacy network, home and community based service programs, and the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit; and 2. Post a statement for how a resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency concerning any suspected violation of state or federal nursing facility regulation for all required postings reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure all medical records regarding the resident's code status consistently reflected the resident's wishes for 1 (#3) of 3( #1, #R1 and #R2) residents reviewed for advanced directives.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (#3) of 3 ( #1, #2, and #3) sampled residents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's status correctly reflected he had an Advanced Directive.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's Care Plan was revised to reflect a change in code status from Full Code to Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) for 1 (#3) of 3 (#1, #2 and #3) sampled residents reviewed for care plans. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 84 Residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure services were provided to meet quality professional standards by failing to ensure physician's orders were accurately transcribed for 1 (#3) of 3 (#1, #2 and #3) residents reviewed for physician's orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure menus were followed to meet the nutritional needs of residents by failing to ensure the correct portion sizes ordered were provided for 1(#2) of 2(#1 and #2) residents reviewed for dining.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the MDS assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 3 (#20, #21, and #90) of 21 sampled residents by failing to ensure: 1. Resident #20 was coded correctly for hospice services, 2. Resident #21 was coded correctly for diagnosis; and 3. Resident #90 was coded correctly for Right Arm Splint.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure PRN orders for psychotropic medications were limited to 14 days and indicated the duration for 3 (#30, #58, and #62) of 6 (#2, #8, #13, #30, #58, and #62) residents reviewed for unnecessary psychotropic medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 (Cart A ) of 2 (Cart A and Cart B) medication carts observed. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Insulin pens were labeled with the date opened; and 2. Insulin pens were discarded 28 days after the date opened.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an infection prevention and control program was maintained by failing to ensure S9CNA appropriately discarded a soiled brief and wipes with visible feces.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure services were provided to meet quality professional standards for 2 (#1, #R1) of 4 (#1, #2, #3, and #R1) residents reviewed with urinary catheters. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 and Resident #R1 had a physician's order to maintain an indwelling urinary catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain accurate records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 2 (#1, #R1) of 4 (#1, #2, #3, and #R1) residents reviewed with indwelling urinary catheters. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff documented catheter care and monitoring of adverse signs and symptoms every shift for Resident #1 and Resident #R1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified of a change in condition for 1 (#1) of 4 (#1, #2, #3, and #R1) residents reviewed with urinary catheters. The nursing staff failed to ensure the physician was informed when Resident #1 had blood in his urine.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident had the right to be free from physical abuse by another resident for 1 (#4) of 5 (#2, #3, #4, #5, and #6) residents reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to protect Resident #4 from physical abuse by Resident #5. The facility implemented corrective actions which were completed prior to the State Agency's investigation, thus it was determined to be a Past Noncompliance citation.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from sexual abuse for 1 (Resident #5) of 6 (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6) sampled residents reviewed for sexual abuse. The deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 08/29/2023 when Resident #4, a moderately cognitively impaired resident, returned to the facility from a psychiatric hospital stay for sexually inappropriate behaviors. Upon Resident #4 returning to the facility on [DATE], he continued to exhibit sexually inappropriate behaviors with staff. On 09/13/2023 at 1:45 p.m., Resident #4 grabbed Resident #5's breast. After the incident, Resident #4 was placed on 1:1 supervision for 72 hours. After 72 hours, the 1:1 supervision was discontinued and no new interventions were implemented to ensure Resident #4 would not sexually abuse another resident. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure it was administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. The facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #5) of 6 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6) sampled residents reviewed for sexual abuse were free from sexual abuse by failing to: 1. Protect 1 (Resident #5) female resident from sexual abuse by Resident #4, a resident with known sexually inappropriate behaviors; and 2. Implement interventions to prevent further sexual abuse by Resident #4. The deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 08/29/2023 when Resident #4, a moderately cognitively impaired resident, returned to the facility from a psychiatric hospital stay for sexually inappropriate behaviors. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure the Care Plan was revised for 2 (#4 and #5) of 6 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6) sampled residents reviewed for care plans.
6 fire safety citations on file: 2 on March 18, 2026, 4 on May 22, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| October 23, 2023 | Fine | $3,147 |
| October 5, 2023 | Fine | $193,667 |
| October 2, 2023 | Fine | $2,098 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Louisiana | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.68 | 3.76 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.26 | 0.31 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.94 | 3.21 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.30 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.12 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 47.5% | 47.6% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 33.3% | 41.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.86 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.99 on weekdays and 2.94 on weekends, 26% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.5% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.73 in April to June 2025 to 3.68 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.68 | 0.26 | 3.99 | 2.94 | 0.5% | 0 of 90 | 98 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.62 | 0.22 | 3.91 | 2.90 | 0.3% | 0 of 92 | 98 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.81 | 0.27 | 4.08 | 3.12 | 0.2% | 0 of 92 | 92 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.73 | 0.23 | 4.03 | 2.98 | 0.1% | 0 of 91 | 90 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Louisiana, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.64 | 0.26 | 3.86 | 3.10 | 3.6% | 0.9% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Louisiana, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $14.67 | $13.97 to $16.87 | 20,690 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $27.63 | $23.87 to $29.43 | 17,600 |
| Registered nurses | $38.57 | $33.19 to $45.00 | 48,970 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Louisiana | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 24.4 | 17.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.0 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.7 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 3.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 23.3 | 17.9 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.4 | 5.6 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 25.6 | 22.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 30.8 | 28.0 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 17.1 | 14.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 2.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 5.1 | 2.7 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Fair City Health and Rehab's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (38.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
38.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Louisiana: 16 better, 33 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 53 eligible stays.
11.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Louisiana: 0 better, 3 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 67 eligible stays.
8.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Louisiana: 1 better, 7 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 50 eligible stays.
40.5% this home
Median of homes: Louisiana50.0% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 42 residents counted.
3.9% this home
Median of homes: Louisiana1.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 77 residents counted.
3.2% this home
Median of homes: Louisiana2.8% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 77 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Louisiana100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 8 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: 2000 FRANK SNF LLC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clf Investments, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 7% | 03/01/2024 |
| M5 Operations, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 86% | 03/01/2024 |
| Moody, Charles | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 86% | 03/01/2024 |
| Robledo, Rafael | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Hughes, Odie | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 03/01/2024 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Louisiana. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.