Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation in Abbeville, Louisiana, has a Trust Grade of B, indicating it is a good choice among nursing homes. It ranks #34 out of 264 facilities in Louisiana, placing it in the top half, and #3 out of 6 in Vermilion County, meaning there are only two local options that perform better. The facility is improving, having reduced issues from 7 in 2024 to just 1 in 2025, which is encouraging. Staffing is average with a rating of 3 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 51%, slightly higher than the state average, indicating some challenges in staff retention. Notably, there have been no fines, which is a positive sign for compliance. However, there have been concerns related to food safety and nutritional standards, including failures in maintaining a clean kitchen and not following recipes for dietary needs, potentially impacting residents' health and dining experiences. While there are strengths in RN coverage, being better than 75% of facilities, families should weigh these factors when considering care options.
- Trust Score
- B
- In Louisiana
- #34/264
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 51% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Louisiana facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 18 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 19 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Near Louisiana avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 19 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on policy review, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure allegations of neglect was reported to the State Survey Agency within 2 hours upon learning of the allegation for 1...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2024
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident identified with a qualified mental disorder was r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with profession...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the recipe in order to meet the nutritional needs of the residents as evidenced by kitchen staff failing to:
1) Use th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, interviews, and policy and procedure reviews, the facility failed to:
1. Maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen to prevent cross contamination and the likelihood of foodborne ill...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain accurately documented medical record in accordance with a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0849
(Tag F0849)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with a hospice agency to ensure a resident had a curren...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment accurately affected ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0554
(Tag F0554)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to assess 1 (#74) out of 1 sampled residents for self-administration of...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident rights by not acting promptly upon resident grievances received during monthly resident council meetings and demonstrate t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the environment of a resident was free from accidents ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy review, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) trainee w...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #19
Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included in part: Hypertensive Heart Diseas...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control and prevention program by failing to ensure staff performed hand hygiene when indic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0838
(Tag F0838)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility-wide assessment:
1. accurately identified the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2022
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Assessments
(Tag F0636)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, policy and procedure review and interview, the facility failed to ensure food products that were stored in the dry storage room were dated when package was opened and leftover fo...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident rights by not acting promptly upon resident grievances received during monthly resident council meetings and demonstrate t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0849
(Tag F0849)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with a hospice agency to ensure a resident had a curren...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Louisiana facilities.
- • 19 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Louisiana, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation Staffed?
CMS rates Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 51%, compared to the Louisiana average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation?
State health inspectors documented 19 deficiencies at Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation during 2022 to 2025. These included: 18 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation?
Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by ELDER OUTREACH NURSING & REHABILITATION, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 50 certified beds and approximately 82 residents (about 164% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in ABBEVILLE, Louisiana.
How Does Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (51%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Louisiana. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation Stick Around?
Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation has a staff turnover rate of 51%, which is 5 percentage points above the Louisiana average of 46%. Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation Ever Fined?
Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation on Any Federal Watch List?
Eastridge Nursing & Rehabilitation is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.