WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Westwood Manor Nursing Home, Inc. has received a Trust Grade of C, which means it is average and ranks in the middle of the pack for nursing homes. It holds the #111 position out of 264 facilities in Louisiana, indicating that it is in the top half, and is the #1 facility in Beauregard County. Unfortunately, the facility is worsening, with the number of issues increasing from 7 in 2024 to 8 in 2025. Staffing is a concern, with a rating of 3 out of 5 stars and a high turnover rate of 63%, significantly above the state average. While the home has no fines on record, which is positive, there have been notable concerns regarding infection control, such as improper handling of soiled linens and inadequate cleanliness in the kitchen, which could pose risks to residents' health.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Louisiana
- #111/264
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 63% 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 19 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 27 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
Above Louisiana average (2.4)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
17pts above Louisiana avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
15 points above Louisiana average of 48%
The Ugly 27 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received reasonable needs for 1 (Resident #32) of 1 residents reviewed for accommodation of needs. The facility failed to...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to transmit an admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment within 14 days of completion for 1 (Resident #33) of 1 sampled residents with a MDS...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's comprehensive care plan was revised after each assessment for 1 (Resident #22) of 30 sampled residents. Review of Resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the Facility failed to ensure that a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good personal hygi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure expired medications were not available for administration to residents in 1 (Room A) of 1 medication room checked for safe and secure ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0807
(Tag F0807)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received and the facility provided liquids consistent with resident needs for 1 (Resident #52) resident inv...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure garbage and refuse were disposed of properly. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 95 residents who resided in the f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen to prevent the likelihood of foodborne illnesses and failed to store food in accordance with profession...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a cognitively impaired resident was treated with respect and dignity, and cared for in a manner that promoted enhanceme...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
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 the Resident's right to formulate an advanced directive was p...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, by failing to ensure a resident's bed linens were clean for 1 (Resident #18) of 4 (R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a prompt resolution of an allegation of missing property for 1 (Resident #13) of 1 resident reviewed for grievances by failing to in...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #96
Review of Resident #96's EHR (Electronic Health Record) revealed an admit date of [DATE] with diagnoses including i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Resident #49
Review of Resident #49's medical record revealed an admit date of 12/22/2020 with diagnoses that included Frontotemporal Neurocognitive Disorder, Unspecified Mood Disorder, Major Depressi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to administer the Pneumococcal Vaccine after receiving consent for 1 (#45) of 5 (#2, #45, #57, #66 and #352) residents sampled for Influenza, P...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, comfortable environment for residents by failing to adequately clean the community shower and bath rooms...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 F0925
(Tag F0925)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program to ensure the residents had a pest free environment. The deficient practice had th...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0557
(Tag F0557)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review the Facility failed to treat Residents with respect and dignity by failing to provide a cover for a drainage bag for 1 (#88) of 2 (#43, #88) sampled R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review the Facility failed to ensure their grievance policy and procedure was followed by failing to ensure prompt investigation of an allegation and to prov...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected the residents' s...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the Facility failed to ensure that Residents who were unable to carry out...
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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Resident received adequate supervision to pre...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected the residents' s...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the Facility failed to ensure each Residents' medication regimen was free from unnecessary medications by failing to discontinue an antidepressant as ordered by t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview the Facility failed to maintain a clean, sanitary environment and ensure food was served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Findings:...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview the Facility failed to ensure garbage and refuse were disposed of properly.
Findings:
Observation on 04/24/2023 at 9:20 a.m. of the outside kitchen area accompanied...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "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.
- • 27 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • Grade C (55/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 63% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Westwood Manor, Inc's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Louisiana, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Westwood Manor, Inc Staffed?
CMS rates WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 63%, which is 17 percentage points above the Louisiana average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 62%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Westwood Manor, Inc?
State health inspectors documented 27 deficiencies at WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC during 2023 to 2025. These included: 27 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Westwood Manor, Inc?
WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by RIGHTCARE HEALTH SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 132 certified beds and approximately 92 residents (about 70% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in DERIDDER, Louisiana.
How Does Westwood Manor, Inc Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (63%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Westwood Manor, Inc?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's high staff turnover rate.
Is Westwood Manor, Inc Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC 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 3-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 Westwood Manor, Inc Stick Around?
Staff turnover at WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC is high. At 63%, the facility is 17 percentage points above the Louisiana average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 62%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Westwood Manor, Inc Ever Fined?
WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC 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 Westwood Manor, Inc on Any Federal Watch List?
WESTWOOD MANOR NURSING HOME, INC 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.