1736 Irving Place, Shreveport, LA 71101 · Caddo County · (318) 221-1983
227 certified beds, about 181 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1995
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 195350 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 24, 2025, inspectors cited 20 health deficiencies (the Louisiana average is 6.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 74 health citations since June 2023, 6 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (4 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $294,723 in the last three years; the largest was $235,560, and the latest is dated December 4, 2025.
CMS links it to Wellington Health Care Services, an affiliated group of 14 nursing homes.
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 74 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure injuries received necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing for 2 (#1and #3) residents of 3 sampled residents. The facility failed to ensure:1. Resident #1's right lateral ankle pressure injury remained free of moisture and 2. EBP signage was in place for Resident #1 and Resident #3.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation and interviews, the facility failed to follow procedures to ensure a resident received pain medication to be administered as ordered for 1 (Resident #2) of 6 sampled residents. The facility failed to provide effective pain management due to the resident's scheduled morphine not being available. The deficient practice resulted in an actual harm for Resident #2 on 11/27/2025 at 8:10 p.m. when Resident #2 received a prn (as needed) dose of Oxycodone-acetaminophen 10-325 mg (milligram) po (by mouth) for a pain level of 10 which had a follow-up status of ineffective. The facility had ran out of Resident #2's Morphine Sulfate (controlled substance) narcotic pain medication ordered for the administration of 30 mg 2 tablets for a total of 60 mg po q (every) eight hours. Resident #2's last documented dose of scheduled Morphine was on 11/26/2025 at 2:00 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the provider failed to ensure a plan of care had been developed and implemented for 2 (#1 and #5) of 6 (#1, #2,#3,#4 #5 #6) residents whose care plans were reviewed by:1. Failing to develop a plan of care for the use of a PICC (peripheral inserted central catheter) line for Resident #1 and Resident #5.2. Failing to administer Resident #1 intravenous antibiotic medication as ordered and failing to provide restorative care for Resident #5 as ordered.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed ensure a resident's Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) tube (a soft, plastic feeding tube that goes into the stomach used to provide nutrition when oral intake is inadequate) feeding was not administered while a resident was in a flat position for 1 (#4) of 6 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5 and #6) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure 1 (#165) of 5 (#5, #7, #14, #158, and #165) residents or resident's representatives reviewed for unnecessary medications were informed of risk and benefits, treatment alternatives or other options of psychotropic medications prior to administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations and interviews the facility failed to act promptly to concerns presented in the resident council meetings. The deficient practice affected 4 (#37, #139, #170, #178) of 7 (#37, #45, #139, #170, #173, #174, #178) residents interviewed for resident care and life in the facility. The deficient practice had the potential to affect the total census of 176 residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for 4 (#50, #88, #91, #110) of 11 (#35, #50, #56, #68, #88, #91, #110, #128, #158, #179 #189) residents reviewed for environment. The facility failed to: 1. provide a clean room and a closet door for Resident #110.2. provide linens that were in good repair for all residents. (This had the ability to affect 176 residents residing in the facility.)3. provide the required furnishings in each resident room. The facility failed to provided a chair for Resident #88 and #91.4. provide a clean uncluttered room for Resident #50, Resident #50's clothes were stored on the floor.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to provide the required documents to 1 (#110) of 1 (#110) resident and or resident representative who was transferred out of the facility for treatment. The facility failed to provide Resident #110 a copy of the facility's bed hold policy when transferred out of the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facitiy failed to ensure resident assessments were encoded, transmitted and completed for 1 (#81) of 3 (#81, #130, #183) residents reviewed for resident assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for 2 (#110, #188) out of 63 total sampled residents reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide services according to the written plan of care for 1 (#14) of 5 (#5, #7, #14, #158, and #165) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's lab were obtained as ordered by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to complete their activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain grooming and hygiene for 4 (#50, #68, #74, #187) out of 4 (#50, #68, #74, #187) residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility failed to:1. Ensure Resident #50 received baths, washed hair and toenails were trimmed,2. Ensure Resident #68 received baths, oral care and nail care,3. Ensure Resident #74 received proper peri-care for MASD (moisture-associated skin damage)4. Ensure Resident #187 received baths.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents received care and services that are resident centered, in accordance with professional standards of practice for 2 (#74, #110) of 63 sampled residents. The facility failed to: 1.provide a splint for Resident #74 as ordered.2.complete all admission lab test ordered Resident #110.3.revise/update Resident #110's plan of care to reflect a diagnosis of hyperkalemia.4.complete Resident #110's admission lab in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident environment remains as free of accident hazards for 1 (#158) reviewed for accidents. The facility did not maintain resident #158's wheelchair in safe operating condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide care and services to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status for 1 (#62) resident reviewed for nutrition. The facility failed to consult a Registered Dietician for Resident #62 diagnosed with a pressure ulcer.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations and interview, the facility failed to provide residents necessary respiratory care and services in accordance with accepted professional standards of practice for 5 (#2, #35, #109, #128, #188) out of 6 (#2, #35, #109, #128, #186 and #188) residents reviewed for respiratory. The facility failed to store hand held nebulizer equipment in a covered bag and change and date oxygen tubing and humidification bottles weekly.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review the facility failed to provide specialized rehabilitation services for 1 of 1 (#158) sample resident as required by the resident's plan of care. Resident #158 was not provided restorative services.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to electronically submit accurate direct care staffing information based on payroll to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) as required.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations, and interviews the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. This deficient practice had the potential to effect 176 residents residing at the facility at time of entrance on 07/21/2025 as reported by the Administrator. The facility failed to:1. maintain an up to date monthly tracking and trending for infection prevention and control, 2. ensure resident care equipment, dirty linens and briefs were handled in a sanitary manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to maintain and follow policies and procedures for immunization for 4 (#55, #84, #87, #186) of 5 ( #55, #77, #84, #87 and #186) sampled residents for influenza, pneumococcal disease and COVID-19. The facility failed to educate and offer residents and/or their representative immunizations of pneumonia, influenza and coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and failed to allow them to refuse and/or agree to either of the vaccines.
Inspectors wroteBased of observations and interview the facility failed to have the most recent annual survey results of the facility posted in a place readily accessible to the residents, family members or anyone to review.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews the facility failed to accommodate 1 (#165) out of 1 resident reviewed for personal privacy. The facility failed to ensure Resident #165 had a privacy curtain in a shared room.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview the facility failed to develop an individualized person centered care plan for 1 (#14) of 2 (#5, #14) residents with measurable goals and appropriate interventions to address the care and treatment for a resident with dementia.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observation, and interviews the facility failed to maintain electrical equipment in safe operating condition for 1 (#35) of 11 (#35, #50, #56, #68, #88, #91, #110, #128, #158, #179, #189) residents reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #35's bed control was properly maintained and in safe working order.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident's personal dietary choices were met for 1 (#2) out of 3 (#1, #2, #3) sampled residents. The facility prepared a lunch meal with Resident #2's dislikes.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure 1 (#4) of 6 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6) sampled residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Resident #4's high blood glucose levels were rechecked as ordered after being administered sliding scale insulin for glucose levels greater than 400. 2. Resident #4's blood glucose levels were checked to determine if sliding scale insulin needed to be administered as ordered. 3. Resident #4's MD (medical doctor) was notified when Resident #4's finger stick glucose was greater than 250. 4. Resident #4's Lantus insulin was administered as ordered.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing and prevent the development of new pressure ulcers for 1 (#4) of 4 (#3, #4, #5, and #6) residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to perform wound care as recommended by S2 Wound NP (nurse practitioner) for Resident #4.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the facility's Grievance Policy was followed for 1 (#2) of 7 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6 and #7) sample residents. The facility failed to resolve a grievance of resident #2's call light not being answered and failed to provide a completed review of the grievance in writing and/or verbal to resident #2 or his RP (responsible party).
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from sexual abuse and psychosocial harm from another resident for 3 (Resident #1, #6, #7) of 7 (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, and #7) sampled residents. The deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy on 12/27/2024 at approximately 2:38 a.m., when Resident #1 was approached at his bedside by Resident #2 with Resident #2's penis exposed playing with himself. Residents #6 and #7 resided in the shared resident room at the time of the event. Resident #1 was verbal and his cognition was intact. Resident #1 reported Resident #2 grabbed him by his upper arms and shoulders and he had to wrestle with Resident #2 to get away. Resident #1 reported Resident #2 asked him if he was gay and had his penis exposed, in his hand playing with it. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled its resources to be used effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being for 1 (Resident #1) of 7 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #4, #5, #6, and #7) residents. The deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy on 12/27/2024 at approximately 2:38 a.m., when Resident #1 was approached at his bedside by Resident #2 with Resident #2's penis exposed playing with himself. Residents #6 and #7 resided in the shared resident room at the time of the event. Resident #1 was verbal and his cognition was intact. Resident #1 reported Resident #2 grabbed him by his upper arms and shoulders and he had to wrestle with Resident #2 to get away. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure pain management was provided to a resident who required such services, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (#4) of 5 (#1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) sampled residents reviewed for pain. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4, who reported pain after a post-surgery wound, received medication or interventions to alleviate pain. The deficient practice resulted in an actual harm for Resident #4 on 01/10/2025 at approximately 6:00 p.m. when Resident #4 requested pain medication for her post-surgical wound. Resident #4 requested Tylenol on the evening shift from S3 LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse). S3 LPN told Resident #4 she could not give her anything for pain. Resident #4 called 911 as a result of not getting pain medication. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure an alleged violation of sexual abuse was reported immediately to the facility's administrator and to the state agency within 2 hours after the allegations were made for 1 (#1) of 7 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6 and #7) sample residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of sexual abuse for 1 (#1) of 7 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6 and #7) sample residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medical records were accurately documented for 1 (Resident #2) of 7 (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, and #7) sampled residents. The facility failed to have documentation of a physician's discharge order.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents had access to services outside the facility for 1 resident (#2) out of 3 residents (#2, #3, #4) reviewed for appointments outside the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure the plan of care had been revised for 1 (#4) of 9 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident at risk for wounds received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, to prevent infection, and to prevent wounds for 1 (#5) of 9 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, and #9) sampled residents. The facility failed to ensure an accurate assessment was performed and the Medical Doctor (MD)/Nurse Practitioner (NP) was notifed of a current skin condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives to meet residents' medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 2 (#2, #4) of 4 (#1, #2, #3, #4) sampled residents. The facility failed to ensure: 1.) Resident #2's physician orders had been followed, and 2.) Resident #4's care plan had been revised with each of Resident #4's falls
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident's responsible party was notified when there was a change in condition for 1 (#2) out of 4 (#1, #2, #3, #4) sampled residents. The facility failed to notify Resident #2's responsible party of an infection requiring antibiotic treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to ensure residents with an indwelling catheter received appropriate care and services to prevent urinary tract infections to the extent possible for 1 (#4) of 4 (#1, #2, #3, #4) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure received a written order from the physician for and an informed consent for bed rails prior to installation for 1 (#2) out of 4 (#1, #2, #3, #4) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview the facility failed to ensure required annual abuse and dementia training was completed for 1 direct care staff [S2 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant)] out of 6 [S2 CNA, S3 CNA, S4 CNA, S5 CNA, S6 LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse), S7 LPN] direct care staff personnel records reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations and interviews, the facility failed to accommodate the needs of 2 (#39 and #67) of 5 (#21, #39, #51, #67, and #120) residents investigated for environment. The facility failed to ensure residents' call lights remained within reach.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to consider the views of the resident council group and act promptly to concerns related to laundry presented in the resident council meetings. The deficient practice had the potential to affect a total of 189 residents according to Long-Term Care Facility Application for Medicare and Medicaid dated 06/03/2024.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure a plan of care was developed and implemented for 2 (#25, 98) of 2 residents reviewed for UTI (urinary tract infection). The facility failed to: 1. Develop a plan of care for 2 (#25, 98) residents diagnosed with urinary tract infection. 2. Administer medication as ordered for resident # 98.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure the resident's plan of care was revised to meet the resident's needs for 1 resident (#159) out of 4 residents (#159, #7, #121, #161) investigated for weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to complete their activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain grooming and hygiene for 6 (#25, #57, #98, #120, #141, #174) of 10 residents (#16, #25, #33, #57,#65, #98, #120, #141, #174) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. The facility failed to ensure: 1. residents #25, #57, #98, and #141's fingernails were clean and trimmed. 2. resident #120's toenails were clean and trimmed. 3. resident #174 received scheduled bath/shower.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure 1 (#139) resident out of 1 reviewed for edema received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice by failing to follow physician orders for applying ted hose, monitoring for edema with use of diuretics (Lasix), and revision to care plan of edema with use of diuretics (Lasix).
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure 1 resident (#164) out of 3 residents (#164, #6, #94) investigated with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing and prevent infection. The facility failed to obtain and implement wound care treatment orders on Resident #164 upon readmissionn to the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure: 1. Resident #85 received at least quarterly Registered Dietician assessments according to policy. 2. Monthly weights were documented in EHR (electronic health record) to ensure Resident #135 maintained a desired weight. There were a total of 9 (#7, #21, #34, #52, #79, #85, #135, #159, #161) residents reviewed for nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations and interview the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services for 2 (#85 and #161) of 3 (#21, #85, and #161) residents reviewed for tube feeding. The facility failed to ensure the tube feeding container was appropriately labeled.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents who need respiratory care were provided care consistent with professional standards of practice for 4 (#79, #120, #136, #139) out of 5 (#79, #120, #136, #139, #164) residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure: 1. The oxygen concentrator and filter were clean and the nasal cannula was dated for Resident #79. 2. The respiratory supplies (oxygen mask and tubing for Resident ##139 and nebulizer mask and tubing for Resident #120, #136, and #139 were changed weekly, labeled with date and initials upon opening and stored in plastic bag between uses.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview the facility failed to ensure there was a sufficient number of skilled licensed nurses, nurse aides, and other nursing personnel to provide care and respond to each resident's basic needs. The facility failed to provide the minimum required staffing hours for 3 of 27 weekend days during FY (Fiscal Year) Quarter 1 2024.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to adequately monitor for 2 (# 27, #106) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications out of a total 6 (#27, #67, #72, #78, #106, #175) residents reviewed. The facility failed to adequately monitor residents #27 and #106 for edema while on a diuretic, and resident #27 for bleeding and bruising while on an anticoagulant.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee met at least quarterly. The failed practice had the potential to affect the 189 residents residing in the facility as documented by the facility's Long-Term Care Facility Application for Medicare and Medicaid form [CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services)-671] dated 06/03/2024.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to: 1. Ensure staff practices were consistent with current infection control principles and practices to prevent cross contamination by failing to ensure staff used appropriate PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) during resident care for 1 resident (#112) who was on contact isolation. 2. Ensure an infection prevention and control program was maintained by failing to provide written evidence of implemented infection control policies and procedures for surveillance of tracking and trending of infections in the facility. This deificient practice had the potential to effect the total census was 189 according to the Long-Term Care Facility Application for Medicare and Medicaid Form dated 06/03/2024.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure hallway hand rails were securely affixed to the walls. The facility failed to ensure hand rails were secure on 1 (Hall W) of 4 hallways in the building. This had to potential to affect 31 residents residing on Hall W.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview the facility failed to ensure the MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (#178) of 2 (#178, #34) residents investigated for hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a medical doctor or representative was notified after a resident had a fall in the facility for 2 (#1, #2) of 2 (#1, #2) residents reviewed for falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the Facility failed to ensure a resident with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 (Resident #9) of 13 (Residents #1, #2, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure there were a sufficient number of personnel to provide care and respond to each Resident's basic needs. The facility failed to provide the minimum required staffing hours for 1 of 26 days reviewed during the month of February 2024.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for 2 (#1, #2) out of 4 (#1, #2, #3, #4) sampled residents reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident received care and necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 (#1) out of 4 (#1, #2, #3, #4) sampled residents. The facility failed to follow up on Resident #1 identified skin issue and complete weekly skin checks for Resident #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the provider failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision and to prevent elopement for 1 (#140) out of 1 (#140) residents reviewed for wandering. This failed practice led to an immediate jeopardy situation for Resident #140, which began on 05/06/2023 at 3:25 p.m. when he exited the facility, attempted to walk home and received a ride from a person unknown to him. S20 Agency LPN (licensed practical nurse) failed to notify the appropriate staff after he had not observed Resident #140 after administering four o'clock medications on the evening shift of 05/06/2023. S21 LPN failed to notify the appropriate staff when S20 Agency LPN reported Resident #140 had not been seen after four o'clock. S21 LPN failed to notify appropriate staff during the night shift on 05/06/2023 when Resident #140 was not observed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to be administered to in a manner that used its resources efficiently to ensure staff supervised residents to prevent elopement for 1 (#140) of 1 (#140) residents reviewed for wandering. This failed practice led to an immediate jeopardy situation for Resident #140, which began on 05/06/2023 at 3:25 p.m. when he exited the facility, attempted to walk home and received a ride from a person unknown to him. S20 Agency LPN (licensed practical nurse) failed to notify the appropriate staff after he had not observed Resident #140 after administering four o'clock medications on the evening shift of 05/06/2023. S21 LPN failed to notify the appropriate staff when S20 Agency LPN reported Resident #140 had not been seen after four o'clock. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure the plan of care was developed and/or implemented for 6 (#32, #40, #73, #109, #125 and #130) of 6 residents reviewed. 1. The facility failed to ensure labs were obtained for resident #32 as ordered by the physician 2. The facility failed to ensure splint devices were used according to resident's plan of care for residents #40, #73, #109, #125 and #130.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to complete their (ADLs) activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain proper hygiene and grooming for 4 (#91, #5, #43, #79) of 7 (#32, #67, #5, #43, #91, #79, #111) residents reviewed for ADL. The facility failed to ensure Resident #91 received nails care and weekly skin assessments #5, #43, #79 received nail care #79 face was shaved
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, interviews and observations, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for 4 (Residents #31, #22, #66, #132) of 4 sampled residents (Residents #31, #43, #79, #142) who received nutrition via a PEG (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy) tube. There were 25 residents in the facility with orders for feeding via gastrostomy tube. The facility failed to: 1. Assure tolerance to feedings with gastric residual checks prior to restarting resident's daily feedings for residents #22, #66, and #132. 2. Ensure the water flush and feeding bags were labeled properly for residents #22, #66, and #132. 3. Ensure the tubing was covered to prevent contamination for resident #31.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who required dialysis received services consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (#46) of 1 (#46) resident reviewed for dialysis by failing to communicate and collaborate with the dialysis facility as evidenced by completing dialysis pre/post evaluation form.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments were transmitted within the required timeframe for 1 (#127) of 1 (#127) residents reviewed for assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessments were accurate for 1 (#141) out of 2 (#131, #141) residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility failed to enter an accurate discharge status for Resident #141.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation and interview the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of the bladder received appropriate treatment to prevent urinary tract infections for 1 (#7) of 1 (#7) residents reviewed. The facility failed to position resident #7's catheter bag above the floor.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview the facility failed to ensure the state Adverse Action Website checks were completed at time of hire and then monthly for 5 [S15 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant), S16 CNA, S17 CNA, S18 CNA, S19 CNA] of 5 employees whose personnel files were reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interview the facility failed to ensure nurse aides received required in-service training for 1 [S15 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant)] of 5 employees whose personnel files were reviewed.
4 fire safety citations on file: 2 on July 24, 2025, 2 on January 16, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| December 4, 2025 | Fine | $59,163 |
| February 4, 2025 | Fine | $235,560 |
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) | not reported | 3.76 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | not reported | 0.31 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | not reported | 3.21 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | not reported | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | not reported | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 47.6% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 41.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS note on this home's staffing data: The accuracy of the staffing data for this measure could not be validated by CMS.
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 3.02 on weekdays and 2.52 on weekends, 17% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 2.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 2.88 in April to June 2025 to 2.87 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 | 2.87 | 0.31 | 3.02 | 2.52 | 2.0% | 0 of 90 | 181 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.00 | 0.28 | 3.17 | 2.57 | 3.1% | 0 of 92 | 181 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.37 | 0.79 | 4.55 | 3.91 | 0.3% | 0 of 92 | 177 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.88 | 0.31 | 3.01 | 2.57 | 0.5% | 0 of 91 | 169 |
| 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.
| 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 | 11.6 | 17.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.7 | 1.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.6 | 3.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.7 | 17.9 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.0 | 5.6 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.7 | 22.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 36.7 | 28.0 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 18.6 | 14.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 2.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 2.7 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Highland Place Rehab and Nursing Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (40.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
40.7% 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. 33 eligible stays.
10.8% 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. 42 eligible stays.
11.0% this home
Worse than 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. 47 eligible stays.
50.0% 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. 64 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 137 residents counted.
2.9% 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. 136 residents counted.
85.7% this home
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. 28 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: IRVING PLACE ASSOCIATES LP. CMS links this home to Wellington Health Care Services, a group of 14 nursing homes averaging 1.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wellington Healthcare Services LP | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 07/31/2007 |
| Andwell Investments, LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 01/10/2012 | |
| Andrews, James | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 01/10/2012 | |
| Bailey, Teresa | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Andrews, James | Corporate director | Individual | 07/31/2007 | |
| Andrews, James | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/31/2007 | |
| Kelman, Moshe | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Andrews, James | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/31/2007 | |
| Elkins Road Associates LLC | General partnership interest | Organization | 07/31/2007 | |
| Wellington Healthcare Services LP | Limited partnership interest | Organization | 07/31/2007 |
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.