TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB

614 WESTON STREET, MINDEN, LA 71055 (318) 377-5148
For profit - Limited Liability company 124 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#257 of 264 in LA
Last Inspection: May 2025

Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.

Overview

Town & Country Health & Rehab in Minden, Louisiana has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about its care quality and safety. It ranks #257 out of 264 nursing homes in Louisiana, placing it in the bottom half statewide and #3 out of 3 in Webster County, meaning there are no better local options. The facility's situation is worsening, with the number of reported issues increasing from 2 in 2024 to 10 in 2025. Staffing is somewhat of a strength, rated at 3 out of 5 stars, with a low turnover rate of 25%, which is better than the state average. However, the facility has accumulated $503,826 in fines, which is higher than 98% of other Louisiana facilities, suggesting serious compliance issues. Specific incidents raise red flags about resident safety. For instance, one resident suffered second-degree burns from hot coffee due to the facility's failure to serve beverages at safe temperatures. Additionally, another resident with impaired cognition was able to exit the facility unnoticed and was found in a public road, illustrating a lack of adequate supervision. While there is good RN coverage, the combination of critical incidents and high fines warrants serious consideration for families researching this nursing home.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Louisiana
#257/264
Bottom 3%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
2 → 10 violations
Staff Stability
✓ Good
25% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 23 points below Louisiana's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
Penalties
○ Average
$503,826 in fines. Higher than 65% of Louisiana facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 20 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
14 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 2 issues
2025: 10 issues

The Good

  • Low Staff Turnover (25%) · Staff stability means consistent care
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover is low (25%)

    23 points below Louisiana average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staff retention, fire safety.

The Bad

1-Star Overall Rating

Below Louisiana average (2.4)

Significant quality concerns identified by CMS

Federal Fines: $503,826

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

The Ugly 14 deficiencies on record

3 life-threatening
May 2025 10 deficiencies 2 IJ (2 facility-wide)
CRITICAL (L)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents

⚠️ Facility-wide issue

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to have a system in place to ensure coffee was served t...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to have a system in place to ensure coffee was served to residents at a safe temperature to prevent burn injuries for 1 (#72) of 1 (#72) sampled residents investigated for burns. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy for Resident #72 on 01/14/2025 at approximately 7:20 p.m., when Resident #72 was served hot coffee from the evening snack/hydration cart that she spilled on herself. The resident was sent to the emergency room where it was determined she had second degree burns from the spilled coffee. The deficient practice had the likelihood to cause serious harm or death to 95 residents who were served hot liquids, as identified by S1Administrator. S1Administrator was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 05/22/2025 at 8:00 a.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 05/22/2025 at 4:45 p.m. after it was verified through observations, interviews, and record reviews that the provider implemented an acceptable Plan of Removal prior to the survey exit. The deficient practice remains at a potential for more than minimal harm for all of the 95 residents in the facility. Findings: Review of the American Burn Association Scald Injury Prevention Educator's Guide revealed in part: The severity of a scald injury depends on the temperature to which the skin is exposed and how long it is exposed. Older adults, identified as a high risk group, have thinner skin so hot liquids cause deeper burns with even brief exposure. Their ability to feel heat may be decreased due to certain medical conditions or medications .Scald injuries result in considerable pain, prolonged treatment, possible lifelong scarring, and even death. Third degree burns can occur within 1 second with hot water temperatures at 155 degrees Fahrenheit (F), within 2 seconds at 148 degrees F, within 5 seconds at 140 degrees F, within 15 seconds at 133 degrees F, and within 1 minute at 127 degrees F. All facility policies related to scald prevention were requested of S1Administrator on 04/30/2025 at 4:55 p.m. None were provided. Review of Resident #72's record revealed an admit date of 07/30/2024 and diagnoses including: hypertensive chronic kidney disease with stage 5 chronic kidney disease or end stage renal disease, iron deficiency anemia, seizures, myelodysplastic syndrome, folate deficiency anemia, and dependence on renal dialysis. Review of Resident #72's most recently completed comprehensive MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessments with ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 02/25/2025 (quarterly) revealed the Resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 13 out of 15 indicating she was cognitively intact. Further review revealed Resident #72 required supervision with setup help only for eating. Review of Resident #72's comprehensive care plan revealed in part: the resident had potential for weakness and fatigue due to iron deficient anemia, and had potential for pain due to burn. Review of the facility's incident logs revealed Resident #72 had an injury incident reported on 01/15/2025. Review of the Resident #72's incident report dated 01/15/2025 at 00:32 a.m. for an incident that occurred on 01/14/2025 at approximately 7:20 p.m. revealed in part: incident occurred in resident's room, report prepared by S5LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse): called to resident's room per CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) and noted resident had dropped cup of hot coffee to left arm, from forearm to above elbow. Skin look like huge blister, bursted skin hanging, weeping, red in color with several small blisters intact. Resident says she was drinking her coffee and cup slipped from hand burning her on her arm. -Injury type = burn, injury location = left antecubital, level of pain = 9, level of consciousness = alert, oriented to person, situation, and place. -predisposing physiological factors = weakness -predisposing situation factors = none -other info-very weak, but demanding regarding what she wants. Written statement by S6CNA -resident asked for a cup of coffee on the snack cart. I went and fixed her coffee and came and gave it to her. She started drinking it as I turned around to leave the room, I heard her holler and say she wasted the coffee. I turned the light on to look and that's when I went and got the nurse. Review of Resident #72's Nursing Notes revealed in part: 01/14/2025 at 7:20 p.m. by S5LPN-called to resident's room per S6CNA. Upon entering room noted resident hollering in extreme pain and skin looking like a huge blister burst skin hanging, weeping, red in color and several small blisters intact to left arm (from forearm to above the elbow). S6CNA says resident asked for a cup of coffee and resident had started drinking and cup slipped from hand, scalded resident's arm and she immediately started hollering out in pain. Received order to send to emergency room for evaluation. Ambulance services arrived in a timely manner. Resident continued to complain with extreme pain. When asked her pain scale resident respond #9 (0-10 scale). 01/15/2025 at 00:25 a.m. by S5LPN-resident returned to facility via stretcher per ambulance without new orders. Diagnosis 2nd degree burn. Review of emergency room record dated 01/14/2025 revealed in part: arrival time 8:31 p.m. Patient sent from nursing home for evaluation of burn to left upper extremity from hot coffee. The symptoms/episode occurred just prior to arrival. At their worst the symptoms were moderate. Skin exam: injury, burn (s), 2nd degree burn injury covers approximately 1% of the total body surface area, and is located on the left bicep. Disposition summary: diagnosis-burn of 2nd degree, left bicep. 1% total body surface area. Review of facility inservice training from 05/04/2024 to 04/30/2025 revealed no staff training related to hot liquids and the prevention of resident burns. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 10:58 a.m., S2DON (Director of Nursing) and S7 Corporate Nurse, all investigation and corrective actions for the 2nd degree burn that occurred on 01/15/2025 were requested. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 2:38 p.m., S2DON reported she could not find any investigation of how Resident #72's burn occurred, including the temperature of hot liquids served to residents. S2DON further reported she could not locate any corrective actions that had been implemented to prevent resident burns from hot liquids. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 3:03 p.m., (Dietary Manager) reported kitchen staff prepared the snack and hydration carts, and the CNAs picked it up and delivered it. S8DM reported morning and evening snack carts included coffee service in a pump dispenser that did not keep the coffee hot, it would cool over time. S8DM further reported there was also a self-serve coffee station available to residents in the dining room. S8DM reported temperature checks were not done before putting brewed coffee into the pump dispensers for service to the residents. S8DM reported S1Administrator asked her today about the temperature of the coffee and told her the brew manufacturer informed him the water temperature for brewing had to be 196 degrees F to dissolve the coffee grounds. S8DM reported today was the first time she had heard anything about a concern regarding the temperature of the coffee because Resident #72 was burned with coffee back in January. The temperature of coffee from the self-serve pump dispenser in the dining room available to residents was 127 degrees F as checked by S8DM with surveyor on 04/30/2025 at 3:13 p.m. The temperature of a freshly brewed pot of coffee was 165 degrees F as checked by S8DM with surveyor on 04/30/2025 at 3:18 p.m. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 3:22 p.m., S9LPN reported S6CNA no longer worked for the facility. S9LPN reported she was not working at the time Resident #72 was burned, but Resident #72 told her she burned her arm by spilling coffee on it. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 3:26 p.m., Resident #72 reported she burned her arm back in January of this year when she wasted her coffee on her arm. Resident #72 reported it blistered up really fast, and staff cleaned it and put some cream on it and sent her to the emergency room. Resident #72 reported you could still see the scars and showed her left inner upper arm where there was a 3 to 4 inch by 2 to 3 inch dark patchy area. Resident #72 said it didn't hurt long and the medicine for pain worked well. Said she had never had any other burns or burned her mouth on the coffee because it was so hot you couldn't put it in your mouth, you had to give it a minute to cool off. Said it was still served that hot and that's the way I like it. An attempted telephone interview was made on 04/30/2025 at 4:05 p.m. to the telephone number provided by Human Resources for S6CNA. The following voice message was received: We're sorry, the number you have dialed has calling restrictions that have prevented the completion of your call. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 4:55 p.m., S1Administrator confirmed no corrective actions were implemented to prevent burn injuries prior to today because today was the first I've heard about it. S1Administrator reported he did not do the investigation, and did not interview S6CNA to see how she fixed the coffee for Resident #72 when serving it from the cart. S1Administrator further reported incidents of a clinical nature would be done by the nursing department. S1Administrator confirmed he called the brew machine manufacturer today and was told the brewers were all are set at 196 degrees F to dissolve the coffee grounds and could not be adjusted. The facility implemented the following actions to correct the deficient practice beginning on 04/30/2025: On 4/30/25 dietary staff were in-serviced on tempering coffee by S1Administrator. The process for tempering the coffee is as follows; once the coffee is brewed the dietary department will add a scoop of ice to lower the temperature coffee to 130-135 degrees F to prevent serving excessively hot coffee. The facility uses air pots, and therefore once cooled the coffee temperature will not further rise. The facility also implemented a temperature log for coffee service that is completed by the dietary staff. In-service training to nursing staff in reference to not rewarming coffee, only filling coffee cups to half capacity, and offering coffee with lids to those residents that consume coffee was conducted by the ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) on 4/30/25 at 1:15pm. The S1Administrator and S2DON were in-serviced by the Regional Supervisor on 4/30/2025 at 4:00 p.m. on the facility policy on Incident Investigation and Reporting to include taking action on adverse events to protect and prevent future recurrences. In-service training to nursing staff in reference to not rewarming coffee, only filling coffee cups to half capacity, and offering coffee with lids to those residents who consume coffee was completed by the ADON on 4/30/25 at 1:15pm via in person lecture. Education with Nursing staff, dietary staff, was completed on 4/30/2025 at 1:15PM. Education involved the process listed and actions the facility will take. The education was verbal from NFA (Nursing Facility Administrator) with dietary staff and verbal from ADON to nursing staff. NFA or designee will review/investigate burn incidents weekly beginning 04/30/2025 for the next 3 months or until substantial compliance is achieved. All results will be reviewed weekly in the QA (Quality Assurance) sub-committee until substantial compliance is achieved. NFA will check the coffee temperature log weekly beginning 04/30/2025 for appropriate temperature ranges and continued compliance with temperature checks. Administrator or designee will monitor this process for corrective action daily for the next 3 months beginning 04/30/2025 or until substantial compliance is achieved. These checks will be kept on a monitoring tool/temperature log. All results will be reviewed weekly in the QA sub-committee until substantial compliance is achieved. Non-compliance with the plan shall be subject to progressive discipline up to and including termination. Date Facility Asserts the Likelihood for Serious Harm to Any Recipient No Longer Exists: 04/30/2025. Validation of Plan of Removal: Review of incident logs from 05/01/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed no incidents related to burns. Review of grievance logs from 05/01/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed no grievances related to the temperature of coffee or other liquids served to residents. Review of inservice training records from 05/01/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed in part: -04/30/2025 to kitchen staff 04/30/2025 at 1:00 p.m.-Temper coffee immediately after brewing so it is palatable but safe temp level for the residents' consumption -04/30/2025 to LPNs, therapy and restorative staff by S3ADON-When giving coffee to residents do not rewarm in microwave, fill cup ½ full, cups with lids for residents at high risk for spills, assist those residents that require assistance. Method of deliver=verbal; response=receptive. -04/30/2025 to nursing staff and CNAs by S3ADON-When giving coffee to residents-don't rewarm in microwave, fill cup ½ full, cups with lids for residents at high risk for spills, assist those residents that require assistance. Method of delivery=verbal; response=receptive -04/30/2025-inservice given to S1Administrator and S2DON by S22Regional Supervisor on Incident investigation and reporting. -05/19/2025 to Nursing Staff-Tips to Achieve Past Noncompliance if an Adverse Event Occurs. Review of facility QA meeting notes revealed an emergency QA meeting was held on 04/30/2025 regarding Resident #72's burn from hot coffee. Review of Coffee Temperature Logs maintained in the kitchen from 04/30/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed daily temperature checks of coffee prior to service to residents with none greater than 135 degrees F. Review of Resident Council meeting minutes from meeting held 05/01/2025 revealed in part no complaints about the temperature of coffee or other hot liquids. Review of facility monitoring for burn/scald incidents revealed weekly monitoring of all incident reports by the facility administrator. Review of facility monitoring of coffee temperatures revealed twice weekly monitoring (on Mondays and Thursdays) of coffee temperatures prior to being made available for service to residents. Review of Resident #72's progress notes from 05/01/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed no further burns or incidents with coffee or other hot liquids. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 8:45 a.m., S25CNA said she has had a lot of inservices about the temperature of hot liquids, make sure it's not too hot, don't overfill the cup so it doesn't splash over sides, put a sip-through lid on the cups, don't reheat. Said snack/hydration cart comes out at 10:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.-does not have a microwave on the cart. If resident complains coffee is not hot, don't reheat it and get them a fresh cup. If had spill where resident was burned, she would notify the nurse. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 8:48 a.m., S17CNA Supervisor confirmed inservice training had been done for the CNAs, nurses, and therapy about serving hot liquids-fill cup ½ full, offer a lid, never re-heat coffee or other hot liquids in the microwave, get a fresh cup of coffee. If what is in the carafe is not hot enough, have the kitchen make a fresh batch. If soup, don't re-heat, get a fresh bowl or have the kitchen re-heat what is on the steam table. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 8:55 a.m., S23CNA reported had an inservice about hot liquids-don't re-warm in the microwave-if residents complain it is not hot, get them a fresh cup, same with soup, don't fill the cup or bowl all the way up. Said some residents have been complaining the coffee is not hot enough, get them a fresh cup or have the kitchen brew a fresh carafe-never re-heat in the microwave. Said she was not aware of any other residents being burned/scalded by hot liquids. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 9:20 a.m., S12CNA said they had been inserviced on hot beverages-get a whole new carafe if coffee is not hot enough-never reheat in the microwave, don't fill all the way to the top, put a lid on they can sip through especially if they are weak, have tremors, etc. Snack/hydration cart comes out at 10:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m. , and 6:00 p.m. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 9:06 a.m., S14LPN reported nursing staff had inservice on hot beverages-don't overfill-set beverage on over-bed table-supervise residents who need assistance, lids with sip spout for residents who are weak or have tremors (i.e. Parkinson's). Reported no further burn/scald injury incidents. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 9:12 a.m., S8DM reported the kitchen staff now checks the temperature of coffee before it is placed in the carafes to serve to residents. Reported coffee required 196 degree F water to brew, so ice was added after brewing to bring temp to a safe level of not more than 135 degrees F prior to being made available for service to residents. S8DM reported the supply vendor for dietary and the facility's corporate nurse both advised 135 degree F was the max safe temperature for hot liquids. S8DM Confirmed S1Administrator had conducted inservice training to kitchen staff on checking the temperature of the coffee and measures to bring it to a safe temperature for service to residents. Observation and interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:20 a.m. in the dining room-Resident #44 was drinking coffee from an open plastic mug with a handle. Resident #44 reported the coffee was good, was hot enough and not too hot-never been burned by the coffee. Review of Resident #44's record revealed an MDS dated [DATE] with a BIMS score of 3. Observation and interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:21 a.m. Resident #62 was drinking coffee from an open plastic mug with a handle. Resident #62 reported the coffee was good, was hot enough and not too hot-never been burned by the coffee. Review of Resident #62'srecord revealed an MDS dated [DATE] with a BIMS score of 14. Observation and interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:22 a.m. Resident #74 was drinking coffee from an open plastic mug with a handle. Resident #74 reported the coffee was good, was hot enough and not too hot-never been burned by the coffee. Review of Resident #74's record revealed an MDS dated [DATE] with a BIMS score of 4. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:25 a.m. Resident #72 said she had not had any further burns from coffee or other hot liquids, said they now put her coffee in a disposable cup with a lid that she can drink through and pass it to her. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:28 a.m. Resident #15 in her room-reported she was a coffee drinker, said she had never been burned by the coffee or other hot liquids, the coffee was hot enough, not too hot. Review of Resident #15 's record revealed an MDS dated [DATE] with a BIMS score of 10. Observation on 05/22/2025 from 10:40 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.: S23CNA and S24CNA were passing snacks and beverages to residents in their rooms from the snack/hydration cart. The cart-top had recessed spaces for holding pitchers of cold liquids (tea, kool-aid, water) and a space for holding a metal push-pump coffee dispenser. 12 ounce disposable insulated to go cups with non-slip grip with snap-on leak resistant lids with a sip-through opening. S23CNA served surveyor a cup (asked to serve just like she would a resident) in 12 oz. insulated to go cup ½ full, with a lid that had a sip-through opening, temperature palatable and not scalding. Did not do formal temp check. Temp monitoring from kitchen was 125 degrees F. S23CNA and S24CNA served Resident #64 a cup of coffee in his room, cup ½ full with lid. Review of Resident #64's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 14.
CRITICAL (L) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Administration (Tag F0835)

Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents

⚠️ Facility-wide issue

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, and interviews the facility failed to be administered in a manner that used resources effectively and ef...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, and interviews the facility failed to be administered in a manner that used resources effectively and efficiently to prevent avoidable scald injuries for 1 (#72) of 1 residents (#72) who were investigated for burns. The facility failed to have a system in place to ensure safe temperatures of coffee and other hot liquids served to residents. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy for Resident #72 on 01/14/2025 at approximately 7:20 p.m., when Resident #72 was served coffee and sustained 2nd degree burns to her left arm when she spilled the coffee on herself. Facility administration did not conduct a thorough investigation into the cause of the injury or ensure staff were adequately trained in the prevention of scald injuries related to hot beverages. The deficient practice had the likelihood to cause serious harm or death to 95 residents who were served hot liquids, as identified by S1 Administrator. S1 Administrator was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 05/22/2025 at 8:00 a.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 05/22/2025 at 4:45 p.m. after it was verified through observations, interviews, and record reviews that the provider implemented an acceptable Plan of Removal prior to the survey exit. The deficient practice remains at a potential for more than minimal harm for all of the 95 residents in the facility. Findings: Cross reference F689 All facility policies related to scald prevention were requested of S1 Administrator on 04/30/2025 at 4:55 p.m. None were provided. Review of the facility's Incident Investigation and Reporting Policy (provided to surveyor 05/22/2025) with latest revision date of 05/2024 revealed in part: to provide guidance to the facility for investigation and reporting incidents of abuse, neglect and/or other reportable incidents . 5. Additional incidents that must have a thorough investigation and may require reporting, as determined by the NF .Burns 6. The facility will thoroughly investigate all alleged violations under the direct supervision of the Administrator. The facility will take all necessary steps to prevent occurrence while the investigation is in progress. Consider emergency QA meeting and processes as needed. 7. During and after the investigation, the residents will be protected from harm through frequent supervision by staff. 8 .The investigation will include the following: a. Written report from the person reporting the incident b. Name, phone number, address of the person reporting the incident c. Name, phone number, address of all witnesses. d. Signed statements from all witnesses including the accused if applicable, stating time and date. Detailed account of incident using incident witness statement section of incident report e. Resident's statement regarding the incident, if appropriate f. If only oral information can be obtained for a statement there must be at least two persons present to receive information. g. The reporter must have the statement read back to him/her. Reporter must sign. Recorder and witness must also sign. i. Necessary corrective/preventative action Review of facility inservice training from 05/04/2024 to 04/30/2025 revealed no staff training related to hot liquids and the prevention of resident burns. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 10:58 a.m., S2 DON (Director of Nursing) and S7 Corporate Nurse, all investigation and corrective actions for the 2nd degree burn that occurred on 01/15/2025 were requested. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 2:38 p.m., S2 DON reported she could not find any investigation of how Resident #72's burn occurred, including the temperature of hot liquids served to residents. S2 DON further reported she could not locate any corrective actions that had been implemented to prevent resident burns from hot liquids. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 3:03 p.m., S8 DM (Dietary Manager) reported temperature checks were not done before putting brewed coffee into the pump dispensers for service to the residents. S8 DM reported today was the first time she had heard anything about a concern regarding the temperature of the coffee because Resident #72 was burned with coffee back in January. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 4:55 p.m., S1 Administrator confirmed no corrective actions were implemented to prevent burn injuries prior to today because today was the first I've heard about it. S1 Administrator reported he did not do the investigation, and did not interview S6 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) to see how she fixed the coffee for Resident #72 when serving it from the cart. The facility implemented the following actions to correct the deficient practice beginning on 04/30/2025: 1. S1 Administrator and S2 DON (Director of Nursing) were in-serviced by the Regional Supervisor on 4/30/2025 at 4:00 p.m. on the facility policy on Incident Investigation and Reporting - to include taking action to protect and prevent future occurrences. The Dietary Staff was in-serviced on tempering coffee prior to service. CNAs were in-serviced on not rewarming coffee in the microwave, fill cup only ½ full, assisting those residents that require assistance and offering coffee cup lids to residents that consume coffee. In-service was done by ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) on 4/30/2025 at 1:15pm. 2. How other residents with the potential to be affected by the same deficient practice will be identified and what will be done for them: 95 residents and new admissions have the ability to have this alleged situation affect them. The Dietary staff was in-serviced on tempering coffee prior to service. CNAs were in-serviced on not rewarming coffee in the microwave, fill cup only ½ full and offering to place lids on cups of residents that drink coffee. Inservice was done on 4/30/2025 at 1:15 p.m. 3. What measures will be put into place or what systematic changes will be made to ensure that the deficient practice does not recur: Staff were in-serviced on tempering coffee as follows: once the coffee is brewed, the Dietary staff will add a scoop of ice to temper the coffee to 130-135 degrees F (Fahrenheit) to prevent serving excessively hot coffee. The facility also implemented inservice training to nursing staff in reference to not rewarming coffee, only filling cup ½ capacity and offering lids to cups to residents that drink coffee. 4. NFA (Nursing Facility Administrator) and DON were in-serviced on Incident Investigation and Reporting on 4/30/2025 at 4:00 p.m. The S1 Administrator and S2 DON had an in-service completed via in person lecture by the Regional Supervisor on 4/30/2025 at 4:00 p.m. on the facility policy on Incident Investigation and Reporting to include taking action on adverse events to protect and prevent future recurrences. Inservice training to nursing staff in reference to not rewarming coffee, only filling coffee cups to half capacity, and serving coffee with lids to those residents at high risk for spills was completed by the ADON on 4/30/25 at 1:15 p.m. via in person lecture. Education with Nursing staff, dietary staff, was completed on 4/30/2025 at 1:15 p.m. Education involved the process listed and actions the facility will take. The education was verbal from NFA with dietary staff and verbal from ADON to nursing staff. Policies have been reviewed with no revisions at this time. Date Facility Asserts the Likelihood for Serious Harm to Any Recipient No Longer Exists: 04/30/2025. Validation of Plan of Removal: Review of incident logs from 05/01/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed no incidents related to burns. Review of grievance logs from 05/01/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed no grievances related to the temperature of coffee or other liquids served to residents. Review of inservice training records from 05/01/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed in part: -04/30/2025 to kitchen staff 04/30/2025 at 1:00 p.m.-Temper coffee immediately after brewing so it is palatable but safe temp level for the residents' consumption -04/30/2025 to LPNs, therapy and restorative staff by S3ADON-When giving coffee to residents do not rewarm in microwave, fill cup ½ full, cups with lids for residents at high risk for spills, assist those residents that require assistance. Method of deliver=verbal; response=receptive. -04/30/2025 to nursing staff and CNAs by S3ADON-When giving coffee to residents-don't rewarm in microwave, fill cup ½ full, cups with lids for residents at high risk for spills, assist those residents that require assistance. Method of delivery=verbal; response=receptive -04/30/2025-inservice given to S1Administrator and S2DON by S22Regional Supervisor on Incident investigation and reporting. -05/19/2025 to Nursing Staff-Tips to Achieve Past Noncompliance if an Adverse Event Occurs. Review of facility QA meeting notes revealed an emergency QA meeting was held on 04/30/2025 regarding Resident #72's burn from hot coffee. Review of Coffee Temperature Logs maintained in the kitchen from 04/30/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed daily temperature checks of coffee prior to service to residents with none greater than 135 degrees F. Review of Resident Council meeting minutes from meeting held 05/01/2025 revealed in part no complaints about the temperature of coffee or other hot liquids. Review of facility monitoring for burn/scald incidents revealed weekly monitoring of all incident reports by the facility administrator. Review of facility monitoring of coffee temperatures revealed twice weekly monitoring (on Mondays and Thursdays) of coffee temperatures prior to being made available for service to residents. Review of Resident #72's progress notes from 05/01/2025 to 05/22/2025 revealed no further burns or incidents with coffee or other hot liquids. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 8:45 a.m., S25CNA said she has had a lot of inservices about the temperature of hot liquids, make sure it's not too hot, don't overfill the cup so it doesn't splash over sides, put a sip-through lid on the cups, don't reheat. Said snack/hydration cart comes out at 10:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.-does not have a microwave on the cart. If resident complains coffee is not hot, don't reheat it and get them a fresh cup. If had spill where resident was burned, she would notify the nurse. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 8:48 a.m., S17CNA Supervisor confirmed inservice training had been done for the CNAs, nurses, and therapy about serving hot liquids-fill cup ½ full, offer a lid, never re-heat coffee or other hot liquids in the microwave, get a fresh cup of coffee. If what is in the carafe is not hot enough, have the kitchen make a fresh batch. If soup, don't re-heat, get a fresh bowl or have the kitchen re-heat what is on the steam table. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 8:55 a.m., S23CNA reported had an inservice about hot liquids-don't re-warm in the microwave-if residents complain it is not hot, get them a fresh cup, same with soup, don't fill the cup or bowl all the way up. Said some residents have been complaining the coffee is not hot enough, get them a fresh cup or have the kitchen brew a fresh carafe-never re-heat in the microwave. Said she was not aware of any other residents being burned/scalded by hot liquids. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 9:20 a.m., S12CNA said they had been inserviced on hot beverages-get a whole new carafe if coffee is not hot enough-never reheat in the microwave, don't fill all the way to the top, put a lid on they can sip through especially if they are weak, have tremors, etc. Snack/hydration cart comes out at 10:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m. , and 6:00 p.m. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 9:06 a.m., S14LPN reported nursing staff had inservice on hot beverages-don't overfill-set beverage on over-bed table-supervise residents who need assistance, lids with sip spout for residents who are weak or have tremors (i.e. Parkinson's). Reported no further burn/scald injury incidents. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 9:12 a.m., S8DM reported the kitchen staff now checks the temperature of coffee before it is placed in the carafes to serve to residents. Reported coffee required 196 degree F water to brew, so ice was added after brewing to bring temp to a safe level of not more than 135 degrees F prior to being made available for service to residents. S8DM reported the supply vendor for dietary and the facility's corporate nurse both advised 135 degree F was the max safe temperature for hot liquids. S8DM Confirmed S1Administrator had conducted inservice training to kitchen staff on checking the temperature of the coffee and measures to bring it to a safe temperature for service to residents. Observation and interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:20 a.m. in the dining room-Resident #44 was drinking coffee from an open plastic mug with a handle. Resident #44 reported the coffee was good, was hot enough and not too hot-never been burned by the coffee. Review of Resident #44's record revealed an MDS dated [DATE] with a BIMS score of 3. Observation and interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:21 a.m. Resident #62 was drinking coffee from an open plastic mug with a handle. Resident #62 reported the coffee was good, was hot enough and not too hot-never been burned by the coffee. Review of Resident #62'srecord revealed an MDS dated [DATE] with a BIMS score of 14. Observation and interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:22 a.m. Resident #74 was drinking coffee from an open plastic mug with a handle. Resident #74 reported the coffee was good, was hot enough and not too hot-never been burned by the coffee. Review of Resident #74's record revealed an MDS dated [DATE] with a BIMS score of 4. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:25 a.m. Resident #72 said she had not had any further burns from coffee or other hot liquids, said they now put her coffee in a disposable cup with a lid that she can drink through and pass it to her. During an interview on 05/22/2025 at 10:28 a.m. Resident #15 in her room-reported she was a coffee drinker, said she had never been burned by the coffee or other hot liquids, the coffee was hot enough, not too hot. Review of Resident #15 's record revealed an MDS dated [DATE] with a BIMS score of 10. Observation on 05/22/2025 from 10:40 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.: S23CNA and S24CNA were passing snacks and beverages to residents in their rooms from the snack/hydration cart. The cart-top had recessed spaces for holding pitchers of cold liquids (tea, kool-aid, water) and a space for holding a metal push-pump coffee dispenser. 12 ounce disposable insulated to go cups with non-slip grip with snap-on leak resistant lids with a sip-through opening. S23CNA served surveyor a cup (asked to serve just like she would a resident) in 12 oz. insulated to go cup ½ full, with a lid that had a sip-through opening, temperature palatable and not scalding. Did not do formal temp check. Temp monitoring from kitchen was 125 degrees F. S23CNA and S24CNA served Resident #64 a cup of coffee in his room, cup ½ full with lid. Review of Resident #64's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 14. During a telephone interview on 05/22/2025 at 3:43 p.m. S22Regional Supervisor reported he has been having a weekly telephone meetings with S1Administrator to review all of the corrective measures and monitoring. S22Regional Supervisor reported he had been doing verbal monitoring, but with this incident he had a monitoring tool sheet for the weekly meeting. S22Regional Supervisor reported he was working with a manufacturer that brews coffee at 125 degrees F and was considering ordering one to try it out. S22Regional Supervisor for right now they are doing an ice dump to get the temperature down to 130-135 degrees F.
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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

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 treat residents in a manner that promotes dignity and enhancement...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to treat residents in a manner that promotes dignity and enhancement of his or her quality of life for 2 (#48, #83) of 2 (#48, #83) residents reviewed for dignity. Findings: Review of the facility's Resident Rights policy revealed in part: Every resident in this facility has the right to: 10. Be encouraged to exercise their rights as a resident and citizen to complain, present grievances, or suggestions to staff, administrator, or government officials without any fear of coercion or retaliation. 14. Be free of verbal, psychological, physical and sexual abuse. 17. Be treated with consideration and respect for their personal privacy Review of Resident #48's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS of 15 indicating intact cognition. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #48 had an admit date of 11/01/2020 with the following diagnoses, in part: Peripheral vascular disease, COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease), edema, hypertensive heart disease. Review of Resident #83's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS of 15 indicating intact cognition. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #83 had a readmit date of 12/31/2024 with the following diagnoses in part: COPD, chronic pain syndrome, major depressive disorder, need for assistance with personal care, nicotine dependence, cigarettes with other nicotine-induced disorders. During an interview on 04/29/2025 at 3:40 p.m. Resident #83 reported she was a safe smoker and had her lighter taken away by the new S1 Administrator. Resident #83 reported that about 1 month after the new S1 Administrator started working at the facility, he held a meeting with the smokers and asked everyone to turn in their cigarette lighters. S1 Administrator told the smokers they could no longer go to the front of the building and smoke because it was not a designated smoking area. S1 Administrator told them when the residents moved to this facility they signed the smoking policy which included not having a cigarette lighter in their possession. Resident #83 did not remember signing a smoking policy saying they could not have a cigarette lighter with them. Resident #83 did not understand why they had to turn in the lighters because they had always been able to keep their lighters with them. She came to this facility because she would be free to smoke when she wanted. Resident #83 reported she asked to see where she signed the smoking policy and the S1 Administrator never presented the smoking policy during the meeting or showed them were they signed the smoking policy. Resident #83 further reported the S1 Administrator told them in the meeting, because one resident got caught smoking in his/her room he was confiscating all cigarette lighters. S1 Administrator then held out a bag and told them to all to put their lighters in the bag. Resident #83 reported S1 Administrator did not seem bothered by this, he said just follow the rules. Resident #83 reported some residents who were war veterans did not take this well and were angry. Resident #83 felt her rights were being taken away. During an interview on 04/29/2025 at 3:49 p.m. Resident #48 reported S1 Administrator held a meeting with the smokers and told them they could no longer have cigarette lighters on them. Resident #48 reported he had been at the facility for 8 years and has always had his lighter on him. Resident #48 reported being very upset and angry with S1 Administrator and how S1 Administrator handled the lighter situation. S1 Administrator talked to the smokers like they were kids and took their lighters away from them. Resident #48 reported S1 Administrator made him feel like he was in prison and Resident #48 used to work at a prison. Resident #48 was not aware he signed a policy saying he could not have a cigarette lighter. Resident #48 reported he was never shown the smoking policy by S1 Administrator during the meeting. Resident #48 told S1 Administrator he would move out of the facility and S1 Administrator just looked at him and simply said That's your choice. Resident #48 reported S1 Administrator walked around the facility unaffected or not bothered by the lighter situation. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 10:20 a.m. S18 LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) confirmed S1 Administrator did have a meeting with the smokers and took all of the cigarette lighters away from them. S18 LPN thought if the residents were safe smokers and could light and extinguish their own cigarettes, they could have a lighter in their possession. S18 LPN confirmed S1 Administrator took the cigarette lighters from smokers because one resident was caught smoking in his room. S18 LPN reported Resident #48 had been at the facility for 8 years, always had a lighter and had always been a safe smoker and S1 Administrator took his lighter away from him. Resident #48 was going to leave but did not. S18 LPN reported S1 Administrator spoke to residents but had not seen S1 Administrator be real personable with the residents at the facility. S18 LPN reported most of the staff and residents do not like S1 Administrator. Resident #48 was not very vocal, he was quiet and kept to himself. S18 LPN reported Resident #48 had not said much, but he was pretty upset with the way S1 Administrator went about taking the cigarette lighters away. During an interview on 05/01/2025 at 10:50 a.m. S20 Nursing Home Staff reported he/she did not feel like he/she could go to S1 Administrator with any issues concerning staff or residents. S20 Nursing Home Staff reported S1 Administrator was arrogant and talked to the residents like they were 4th graders or like they were not on his level. S1 Administrator told a resident that was a smoker that he (S1 Administrator) would go through every inch of her room to find her cigarette lighter if he/she did not give him the lighter.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0604 (Tag F0604)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from physical restraint...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from physical restraints imposed for the purpose of discipline or convenience for 1 (#152) of 1 (#152) resident reviewed for restraints. The facility failed to ensure a physician's order was obtained and consent signed for the use of a Geri-chair, bed/chair alarm and side rails for Resident #152. Findings: Review of the facility's Restraint and Safety Devices most current policy with a revision date of 10/2022 revealed: It is the philosophy of this facility that a resident has the right to be free from any physical or chemical restraints not required to treat the residents medical symptoms. Restraints may not be used for the convenience of the nursing staff or as punishment to the resident. Physical Restraint Definition: Any manual method or physical or mechanical device, material or equipment attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the individual cannot easily remove, restricts freedom of movement or normal access to one's body. Any manual method or physical or mechanical device, material or equipment should be classified as a restraint only when it meets the criteria of the physical restraint definition. This is not determined by a type of device or method, but can only be determined on an individual basis by evaluating the effect it has on the resident. Do not focus on the type, intent, or the reason behind the use to determine if should be classified s\as a restraint, focus on the effect. The Restraint Device Worksheet helps to make the determination of whether the device is a restraint or not. If it is determined not to be a restraint, it is a device. If the device being used could be considered a restraint, the Device/Physical Restraint Consent shall be completed. The use of a restraint will require a determination of need to be completed by a licensed nurse, a signed consent and a physician's order prior to applying restraints. The order must be recorded in the resident's medical record and the order must indicate the type of restraint to be used and the medical symptoms that warrant the use of restraints. Residents with new restraints must be reviewed weekly at the High Risk Management meeting until stable and reviewed monthly thereafter. Re-evaluate resident at least quarterly for possible restraint reduction. Before a restraint may be used, the following steps must be followed unless it is an emergency situation: 1. Identify reason for symptoms that indicate the need for a restraint. 2. Remove, if possible, the causes of these symptoms. This may include taking care of special needs, increased rehab. and restorative nursing, modifying the environment and increasing supervision. 3. If the cause cannot be determined and eliminated, attempt alternative treatments under medical supervision. 4. Restraints should be used only after practicable alternatives have failed. The least restrictive device that will protect the resident should be selected and used for the shortest time while less restrictive alternatives are sought. 5. The resident and the family of each resident are informed of the plan of care for restraint use at the time a decision to use a restraint is made. Consent form must be signed at this time informing resident and family of risks and benefits of restraint use. Review of Resident #152's medical record revealed an admit date of 04/10/2025 with the following diagnoses, in part: Cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of right cerebellar artery, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, and muscle weakness. Review of resident #152's admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 indicating moderately impaired cognition. Further review of the MDS revealed trunk restraint - not used; chair prevents rising-not used; bed alarm used daily and resident required substantial/maximal assistance with chair/bed-to-chair transfer. Review of resident #152's care plan dated 04/10/2025 revealed current safety devices and special equipment - Geri-chair/recliner, Security bed alarm, side rails x 2. Further review of Resident #152's care plan revealed resident was at risk of falls with actual falls on 04/11/2025, 04/16/2025, and 04/19/2025. Review of Resident #152's most current physician orders failed to reveal an order for a Geri-chair and a bed/chair alarm. Review of Resident #152's medical record failed revealed a consent was signed for the use of a Geri-chair, bed/chair alarm, and side rails. An observation on 04/28/2025 at 1:19 p.m. revealed Resident #152 was sitting in a Geri-chair with the legs elevated and a chair alarm in place with a bed/chair alarm on the Geri-chair. An observation on 04/29/2025 at 3:06 p.m. revealed Resident #152 was in bed with side rails up x2 with an alarm pad in place under resident. An observation on 04/30/2025 at 1:00 p.m. revealed Resident #152 was up in a Geri Chair with feet elevated and bed/chair alarm on Geri-chair. An observation on 04/30/2025 at 4:24 p.m. revealed Resident #152 was in bed with side rails up x 2 and bed alarm in place. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 2:40 p.m. S2 DON (Director of Nursing) reported Resident #152 was in a Geri Chair upon admit. S2 DON reported Resident #152 did have a bed/chair alarm so if she rolls out it will alert them. During an interview on 05/01/2025 at 8:45 a.m. S7 Corporate RN (Registered Nurse) confirmed Resident #152 did not have an order for side rails, Geri-chair, or bed alarm and reported the facility had never had to get an order for side rails, Geri-chairs or bed alarms.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Room Equipment (Tag F0908)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical equipment in safe operating condition by having a thick, heavy buildup of lint on the lint filters and floor of two...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical equipment in safe operating condition by having a thick, heavy buildup of lint on the lint filters and floor of two of two large, industrial gas dryers in the laundry facility. Findings: Review of the facility's Maintenance Procedures policy (latest revision date 08/2013) revealed in part: The following is a list of minimum requirements for scheduling of cleaning and maintenance: daily-clean lint from dryer filters. Review of the facility's Laundry Safety policy (latest revision date 08/2013) revealed in part: Clean lint screen on dryer at the end of every shift. An observation of the laundry area beginning on 04/30/2025 at 2:09 p.m. with S11 Housekeeping/Laundry revealed the lint filters for the two large industrial gas dryers had a heavy buildup of lint on the filters that was pulling away from the filters. The large dryer on the left also had a 3-4 inch deep pile of lint built up on the back right corner of the lint filter floor. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 2:20 p.m., S11 Laundry/Housekeeping reported the lint filters were supposed to be changed at least after every third load. S11 Laundry/Housekeeping confirmed the lint buildup was more than three loads worth and needed to be cleaned.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0578 (Tag F0578)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure all medical records regarding the resident's code status consistently reflected the resident's wishes for 1 (#54) of 4 (#54, #48, #...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure all medical records regarding the resident's code status consistently reflected the resident's wishes for 1 (#54) of 4 (#54, #48, #33, and #42) residents investigated for Advance Directives. Findings: Review of the provider's Advance Directives policy (latest revision 07/2015) revealed in part: The facility recognizes that all adults have a fundamental right to make decisions relating to their own medical treatment, including the right to accept or refuse medical care. It is the policy of the facility to encourage residents and their family/caregivers to participate in decisions regarding care and treatment. Valid Advance Directives, such as Living Wills, Durable [NAME] of Attorney for Health Care and DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) orders will be followed to the extent permitted and required by law. The facility will conform to state laws regarding implementation of an Advance directive .The admitting staff will document in the medical record and will notify the attending physician verbally and obtain a physician's order if the resident has executed an Advance Directive .All staff providing care for the resident will Review the Advance Directive and clarify any discrepancies between the Directive and current treatment plan .Executing and implementing an Advance Directive is a process, not a one (1) time event .If the POST (Physician Order for Scope of Treatment) conflicts with the resident's previously expressed health care instructions or advanced directive, then, to the extent of the conflict, the most recent expression of the resident's wishes are honored. Review of Resident #54's record revealed an admit date of 04/30/2024, and diagnoses including but not limited to: unspecified Alzheimer's Disease, anxiety disorder, unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, major depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and age-related physical debility. Review of Resident #54's most recently completed comprehensive MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessments with ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 01/21/2025 (quarterly) revealed in part: BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) interview was not conducted-resident is rarely/never understood-short term memory problem, severely impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making. Review of Resident #54's Living Will on the electronic chart revealed in part:-Declaration of Individual concerning Treatment for Terminal Illness Pursuant to La.R.S.40:1299.58.3-Declaration made 08/08/2016: I Resident #54, being of sound mind, willfully and voluntarily make known my desire that my dying shall not be artificially prolonged under the circumstances set forth below and do hereby declare/direct that life-sustaining procedures, except nutrition and hydration, be withheld or withdrawn so that food and water can be administered invasively. In the absence of my ability to give directions regarding the use of such life-sustaining procedures, it is my intention that this declaration shall be honored by my family and physician(s) as the final expression of my legal right to refuse medical or surgical treatment and accept the consequences from such refusal. Review of Resident #54's Power of Attorney dated 08/08/2016 revealed the resident appointed two family members as her agents with authorization to include durable health care power of attorney including consult with my attending physicians to accept or refuse on my behalf the giving of life-sustaining medical treatments or interventions. Review of Resident #54's LaPOST (Louisiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment) dated and signed by Resident #54's responsible party and the medical doctor on 04/30/2024 revealed CPR (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation)/full treatment had been selected. Further review revealed Section D Summary - the basis for these orders is: No Advance Directive. Review of Resident #54's current physician's orders revealed an order dated 06/25/2024 for full code. Review of Resident #54's comprehensive care plan revealed in part: Focus-full code; Goal - resident and family wishes will be honored through next review; Interventions - If cardiac arrest occurs, INITIATE CPR AND CALL 911; Respect resident/family wishes, review and update code status with resident/family as needed. During an interview on 04/29/2025 at 4:25 p.m. S10 Admissions LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) and S3 ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) reviewed Resident #54's Living Will dated 08/08/2016 and confirmed the resident had expressed her wishes to have life-sustaining procedures withheld. S10 Admissions LPN and S3 ADON further reviewed Resident #54's LaPOST and order and agreed it directed CPR and full treatment to be provided, contradicting the resident's last known expression of her wishes. S10 Admissions LPN and S3 ADON confirmed the Power of Attorney and Living Will were executed on the same date, and the Power of Attorney should not override the Living Will. S10 Admissions LPN and S3 ADON further confirmed Resident #54's LaPOST and order for a full code needed to be clarified.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review, observation and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 2 (#21, #80) out 36 total sampled residents. The facility...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, observation and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 2 (#21, #80) out 36 total sampled residents. The facility failed to: 1. Develop care plan for Resident #21's elopement/wander risk and security bracelet, and 2. Develop care plan for Resident #80's chronic kidney disease and anticoagulant therapy. Findings: Resident #21 Review of Resident #21's medical records revealed an admit date of 01/02/2025 with the following diagnoses, including in part: other lack of coordination, weakness, unspecified dementia/unspecified severity without behavioral disturbance/psychotic disturbance/mood disturbance and anxiety, and age-related physical debility. Review of Resident #21's Comprehensive Care Plan revealed failed to reveal a problem and approach for elopement/wanderer risk and security bracelet. Review of Facility's List of Residents with Security Bracelet revealed Resident #21 with an expiration of 08/2025. Observation on 04/28/2025 at 9:15 a.m. revealed Resident #21 revealed a security bracelet to the right ankle. During an interview of 04/29/2025 at 3:55 p.m. S2 DON (Director of Nursing) acknowledged Resident #21 was not care planned for elopement/wandering risk and should be. Resident #80 Review of Resident #80's medical records revealed an admit date of 08/09/2023 with the following diagnoses, including in part: and hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure and stage 1 through stage 4 chronic kidney disease. Review of Resident #80's Physician's orders revealed an order dated 01/03/2025 for Apixaban oral tablet 2.5 mg (milligram) give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Review of Resident #21's Comprehensive Care Plan revealed failed to reveal a problem and approach for chronic kidney disease and anticoagulant therapy. During an interview on 05/01/2025 at 8:50 a.m. S2 DON acknowledged Resident #80 was not care planned for chronic kidney disease and anticoagulant therapy and should be.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0698 (Tag F0698)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate care and services had been provid...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate care and services had been provided for 1 (#72) of 1 (#72) residents reviewed for dialysis. The facility failed to: 1. obtain a physician's order for dialysis that included the dialysis schedule and dialysis center contact information, 2. ensure Resident #72's dialysis access site was assessed and monitored daily per facility policy, and 3. ensure nursing staff was familiar with Resident #72's care requirements related to her dialysis. Findings: Review of the facility's Hemodialysis-Care of Resident policy (latest revision 12/2020) revealed in part: Goals: Maintain continuous flow of blood through shunt and prevent complications of infection, clotting, cutaneous erosion, or shunt separation. Evaluation: 1. Locate the site of the shunt. 2. Daily check the site for bruit or thrill, pain, swelling, redness, excessive warmth, serious or purulent drainage indicating infection. Check site for coolness, presence of dark colored blood, absence of bruit on auscultation indicating clotting in shunt, erosion of skin indicating cutaneous erosion, and for bleeding. Lack of bruit at the venous access site for dialysis may indicate a blood clot requiring immediate surgical attention. (some dialysis accesses will be a [NAME] Catheter which will not have a thrill.) 3. Notify physician immediately of problems. Review of Resident #72's record revealed an admit date of 07/30/2024, and diagnoses including but not limited to: hypertensive chronic kidney disease with stage 5 chronic kidney disease or end stage renal disease, and dependence on renal dialysis. Review of Resident #72's MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessments with ARD (Assessment Reference Date) dated 02/25/2025 (quarterly) revealed the resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 13 out of 15 indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #72's current physician's orders revealed no order for dialysis, no order for monitoring of Resident #72's dialysis access device, and no order for fluid restriction. Review of Resident #72's April 2025 MAR (Medication Administration Record) failed to reveal the dialysis access site was monitored. Review of Resident #72's April 2025 TAR (Treatment Administration Record) failed to reveal the dialysis access site was monitored. Review of Resident #72's tasks section of the electronic health record failed to reveal the dialysis access site was monitored. Review of Resident #72's comprehensive care plan revealed the resident was care planned for dialysis secondary to end stage renal disease with interventions that included: observe access site, observe for signs and symptoms of renal insufficiency, bleeding, bacteremia, septic shock, fluid restriction as ordered. Review of Resident #72's medical records failed to reveal information related to the dialysis schedule, dialysis center contact information, or facility monitoring of the dialysis access site. During an observation and interview on 04/29/2025 at 9:50 a.m. Resident #72 reported she went to dialysis every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Resident #72 further reported her dialysis access was in her right chest wall. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 11:06 a.m. S9 LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) reported Resident #72 was supposed to be on a fluid restriction. S9 LPN reviewed Resident #72's orders and confirmed there was no physician's order for a fluid restriction and no order for dialysis including the dialysis schedule and contact information. S9 LPN further reported Resident #72's dialysis access site was in her left arm because she was not supposed to have any blood pressures or sticks in her left arm. S9 LPN further reported she had never documented monitoring of Resident #72's dialysis access site. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 11:17 a.m. S3 ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) reported none of the dialysis residents were on a fluid restriction. S3 ADON confirmed there was not an order for Resident #72's dialysis. S3 ADON reported the monitoring of Resident #72's dialysis access site should be documented in the tasks section of the electronic medical record and was not. S3 ADON reported there should be an order for dialysis including the dialysis schedule and the dialysis center information and phone number, and there was not.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0700 (Tag F0700)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to: 1) ensure residents had a physician's order for si...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to: 1) ensure residents had a physician's order for side rails, 2) obtain informed consent from the resident or resident's representative for side rail use, and/or 3) assess residents for the risk of entrapment from side rails prior to the installation of side rails for 3 (#37, #81, #152) of 3 (#37, #81, #152) residents reviewed for side rails. Findings: Policy: Review of the facility's Restraints and Safety Devices last revised 10/2022 revealed: It is the philosophy of this facility that a resident has the right to be free from physical or chemical restraints not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms. Restraints may not be used for the convenience of the nursing staff or as punishment to the resident. Any manual method or physical or mechanical device, material or equipment attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the individual cannot easily remove, restricts freedom of movement or normal access to one's body. Any manual method or physical or mechanical device, material or equipment should be classified as a restraint only when it meets the criteria of the physical restraint definition. This is not determined by a type of device or method, but can only be determined on an individual basis by evaluating the effect it has on the resident. Do not focus on the type, intent, or the reason behind the use to determine if should be classified s\as a restraint, focus on the effect. The Restraint Device Worksheet helps to make the determination of whether the device is a restraint or not. If it is determined not to be a restraint, it is a device. If the device being used could be considered a restraint, the Device/Physical Restraint Consent shall be completed. The use of a restraint will require a determination of need to be completed by a licensed nurse, a signed consent and a physician's order prior to applying restraints. The order must be recorded in the resident's medical record and the order must indicate the type of restraint to be used and the medical symptoms that warrant the use of restraints. Residents with new restraints must be reviewed weekly at the High Risk Management meeting until stable and reviewed monthly thereafter. Re-evaluate resident at least quarterly for possible restraint reduction. Before a restraint may be used, the following steps must be followed unless it is an emergency situation: 1. Identify reason for symptoms that indicate the need for a restraint. 4. Restraints should be used only after practicable alternatives have failed. The least restrictive device that will protect the resident should be selected and used for the shortest time while less restrictive alternatives are sought. 5. The resident and the family of each resident are informed of the plan of care for restraint use at the time a decision to use a restraint is made. Consent form must be signed at this time informing resident and family of risks and benefits of restraint use. Residents must be screened for use of approved restraints to meet their particular needs. Side rail usage should also be reviewed If used, the facility must assess the resident for risk of entrapment . Resident #37 Review of Resident #37's medical record revealed an admit date of 12/01/2022 with the following, in part: Parkinson's disease with dyskinesia, primary generalized, unsteady on feet, muscle weakness, lack of coordination, history of falling, major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #37's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment 02/25/2025, revealed Resident #37 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 15 indicating intact cognition and was extensive assist/2+ persons physical assist with bed mobility and transfers. Review of Resident #37's current physician orders failed to reveal an order for side rails. Review of Resident #37's medical record failed to reveal documentation of a signed consent for side rails. An observation on 04/29/2025 at 10:11 a.m. revealed Resident #37 in bed with side rails up x 2. An observation on 04/30/2025 at 10:15 a.m. revealed Resident #37 in bed with HOB (head of bed) and side rails up x 2. During an interview on 05/01/2025 at 8:45 a.m. S7 Corporate RN (Registered Nurse) confirmed Resident #37 did not have an order for side rails and further reported they have never had to get an order for side rails. Resident #81 Review of Resident #81's medical records revealed an admit date of 01/27/2025 with the following diagnoses, including in part: Type 2 diabetes mellitus with other specified complication, Alzheimer's disease unspecified, vascular dementia/severe with other behavioral disturbance, unspecified psychosis not due to a substance or known physiological condition, delusional disorders, repeated falls, other amnesia, personal history of other mental and behavioral disorders and other insomnia. Review of Resident #81's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed no BIMS score; resident is rarely/never understood. Further review revealed Resident #81 was impaired on both upper extremities. Review of Resident #81's current physician orders failed to reveal an order for side rails. Review or Resident #81's medical record failed to reveal an entrapment risk evaluation had been completed. Review of Resident #81's medical record failed to reveal documentation of a signed consent for side rails. An observation on 04/28/2025 at 8:50 a.m. revealed Resident #81 lying bed with assist side rails up x 2. An observation on 04/30/2025 at 8:45 a.m. revealed Resident #81 sitting up in bed with cereal in front of her while sleeping and assist side rails up x 2. An observation on 04/30/2025 at 4:30 p.m. revealed Resident #81 lying bed with assist side rails in place x 2. During an interview on 05/01/2025 at 11:10 a.m. S21 LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) reported Resident #81 is unable to adjust her assist side rails due to her confusion and weakness. Resident #152 Review of Resident #152's medical record revealed an admit date of 04/10/2025 with the following diagnoses, in part: Cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of right cerebellar artery, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, and muscle weakness. Review of Resident #152's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 10 indicating moderately impaired cognition. Further review of the MDS revealed trunk restraint - not used; chair prevents rising-not used; bed alarm used daily and resident required substantial/maximal assistance with chair/bed-to-chair transfer. Review of Resident #152's care plan dated 04/10/2025 revealed current safety devices and special equipment - Geri-chair/recliner, Security bed alarm, side rails x 2. Further review of Resident #152's care plan revealed resident was at risk of falls with actual falls on 04/11/2025, 04/16/2025, and 04/19/2025. Review of Resident #152's most current physician orders failed to reveal an order for side rails. Review of Resident #152's medical record failed to reveal an entrapment risk evaluation had been completed. Review of Resident #152's medical record failed to reveal documentation of a signed consent for side rails. An observation on 04/29/2025 at 3:06 p.m. revealed Resident #152 in bed with side rails up x 2. An observation on 04/30/2025 at 4:24 p.m. revealed Resident #152 in bed with side rails up x 2. During an interview on 04/30/2025 at 2:40 p.m. S2 DON (Director of Nursing) reported Resident #152 did have side rails for positioning. During an interview on 05/01/2025 at 8:45 a.m. S7 Corporate RN (Registered Nurse) confirmed Resident #152 did not have an order for side rails and further reported the facility had never had to get an order for side rails.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0726 (Tag F0726)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistants) demonstr...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistants) demonstrated competency in skills and techniques necessary to care for residents' needs for 2 (#152, #301) of 2 (#152, #301) residents observed during perineal care (peri-care) and/or indwelling urinary catheter care. The facility failed to ensure CNAs: 1. Properly cleaned the perineal area of Residents #152, and 2. Placed continuous tube feeding on hold, followed accepted infection control practices, and properly anchored the indwelling urinary catheter to prevent tension or potential dislodgement during perineal care and indwelling urinary catheter care for Resident #301. Findings: Policies: Review of the facility's Perineal Care policy (latest revision date of 01/2024) revealed in part: Female - without catheter. 10. When soap is used, rinse genital area moving front to back using a clean portion of the washcloth or pre-moistened wash wipe for each stroke. Review of the provider's Perineal Care policy (latest revision date 01/2024) revealed in part: Resident with a catheter. 3. Using one hand hold the catheter close to the urethral opening to prevent tension as you wash the tubing. Do not let the tubing cause traction on the urethra at any time. Review of the provider's Tube Feeding policy (latest revision 12/2015) revealed in part: A resident who is fed by nasogastric, jejunostomy or gastrostomy tubes will receive appropriate treatment and services to prevent aspiration pneumonia. Resident #152 Review of the medical record revealed Resident #152 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of the right cerebellar artery, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction affecting the left non-dominant side, muscle weakness and diabetes mellitus due to underlying condition with diabetic neuropathy. An observation on 04/28/2025 at 2:36 p.m. revealed S15 CNA and S16 CNA performed perineal care on Resident #152. After S15 CNA cleaned Resident #152's front genital area, Resident #152 was rolled over to her right side. S16 CNA wiped Resident #152's back genital area from back to front using a pre-moistened wipe. During an interview on 04/28/2025 at 2:42 p.m. S15 CNA acknowledged when she assisted S16 CNA provide peri-care to Resident #152, S16 CNA wiped Resident #152's gential area from back to front and it should have been performed front to back. During an interview on 05/01/2025 at 9:46 a.m. S17 Supervisor CNA confirmed CNAs should wipe residents from front to back when performing peri-care. Resident #301 Review of the medical record revealed Resident #301 had an admit date of 11/01/2020 with the following diagnoses, including in part: COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease), encounter for attention to tracheostomy, and persistent vegetative state, indwelling urinary catheter, and indwelling nephrostomy catheter. During an observation on 04/29/2025 at 2:05 p.m., S12 CNA performed incontinence care for Resident #301 assisted by S13 CNA - PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) including gown and gloves were donned, and Resident #301's head was lowered prior to initiating care. Tube feeding was in progress at 65 cc (cubic centimeters) per hour. After cleansing Resident #301's perineal area, S12 CNA cleansed Resident #301's indwelling urinary catheter without anchoring it properly to prevent tension or potential dislodgement. S12 CNA held the catheter tubing approximately 6 to 8 inches distal to the meatus with her right hand while she was wiping with her left hand from the meatus toward her right hand. S12 CNA then turned the resident and cleansed feces from the resident wiping from front to back. She removed her soiled gloves, reached under her protective gown to get another pair of gloves from her uniform pocket and applied the clean gloves all without sanitizing her hands. She then proceeded to apply a clean brief, and then handled the indwelling urinary catheter tubing, indwelling nephrostomy catheter tubing, and nephrostomy collection bag. During the entire procedure the resident's head of bed was flat and the tube feeding was in progress at 65 cc per hour. During an interview on 04/29/2925 at 2:20 p.m. S12 CNA reported she thought she had properly anchored Resident #301's catheter. S12 CNA acknowledged she reached beneath her protective gown to get clean gloves after cleaning feces without sanitizing her hands and should not have. S12 CNA further confirmed the tube feeding was in progress during the time the head of bed was flat and should not have been.
Apr 2024 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0655 (Tag F0655)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record reviews and interview the facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan had been developed for 1 (#201) out of 5 ( #30, #43, #51, #85, #201) residents reviewed for unnecessary medicat...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews and interview the facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan had been developed for 1 (#201) out of 5 ( #30, #43, #51, #85, #201) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility failed to ensure a person centered baseline care plan had been developed for Resident #201. Findings: Review of Resident #201's face sheet revealed an admit date of 03/30/2024 with the following diagnoses but not limited to fracture upper/lower end right fibula, subsequent for closed fracture with routine healing, displaced fracture of medial malleolus of right tibia, chronic kidney disease, and dementia. Review of Resident #201's April 2024 Physician Orders revealed: 03/30/2024: Seroquel 25 mg (milligrams) tablet; Give one by mouth once daily at bedtime 03/20/2024: Galantamine ER (extended release) 8 mg capsule; Give one by mouth once daily 03/30/2024: Duloxetine Hydrochloride DR (delayed release) 20mg capsule; Give one by mouth twice daily 03/30/2024: Lovenox 40 mg/0.4 ml (milliliters) syringe; Give one subcutaneous once daily at bedtime Review of Resident #201's EHR (Electronic Health Record) and medical record chart failed to reveal a baseline care plan. During an interview on 04/02/2024 at 4:00 p.m., S3 RN (Registered Nurse) / MDS (Minimum Data Set) reviewed Resident #201's EHR and confirmed a baseline care plan had not been developed for Resident #201.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Room Equipment (Tag F0908)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record reviews and interview the facility failed to ensure 3 of 3 glucometers used in the facility were maintained in safe operating condition for residents residing on Halls A, B and C with ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews and interview the facility failed to ensure 3 of 3 glucometers used in the facility were maintained in safe operating condition for residents residing on Halls A, B and C with orders for blood glucose monitoring. S1Administrator provided a list of 18 residents who resided on Halls A, B and C who received regularly ordered blood glucose monitoring with the facility's glucometers. Findings: Review of the facility's daily Blood Glucose Quality Control Log book from January 2024 through March 2024 revealed glucometer controls were not performed on the following days: Hall A: 02/02/2024, 02/03/2024, 02/04/2024, 02/09/2024, 02/10/2024, 02/11/2024, 02/24/2024, 02/25/2024, 03/02/2024, 03/03/2024, 03/23/2024, and 03/24/2024. Hall B: 01/01/2024, 01/02/2024, 01/03/2024, 01/05/2024, 01/06/2024, 01/07/2024, 01/12/2024, 01/13/2024, 01/14/2024, 01/26/2024, 01/27/2024 and 01/28/2024. Hall C: 02/23/2024, 02/24/2024, 02/25/2024, 03/02/2024, 03/03/2024, 03/04/2024, 03/08/2024, 03/09/2024, 03/10/2024, 03/12/2024, 03/13/2024, 03/15/2024, 03/16/2024, 03/17/2024, 03/22/2024, 03/23/2024 and 03/24/2024. During an interview on 04/03/2024 at 3:11 p.m., S2DON (Director of Nursing) confirmed glucometer control checks were not done daily and should have been performed by the night shift nurse every day.
Apr 2023 2 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record reviews, and observations the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for 1 (#1) of 6 (#1, #...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record reviews, and observations the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for 1 (#1) of 6 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6) sampled residents reviewed for impaired cognition and/or a diagnosis that may increase their risk of elopement. The deficient practice resulted in Immediate Jeopardy for Resident #1 on 03/25/2023 at 7:38 p.m. when Resident #1 exited through the front door of the facility. Resident #1 was found in the middle of a two lane public road by a concerned community citizen approximately one tenth of a mile from facility. The facility was notified by a concerned community citizen that Resident #1 was outside in the middle of the road 18 minutes after Resident #1 exited the facility. Resident #1 returned to facility assisted by S4 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) at 8:00 p.m. on 03/25/2023. Facility staff immediately notified S2 DON (Director of Nursing), Resident #1's daughter, and Resident #1's doctor of incident and S2 DON notified S1 Administrator of incident. An order was received to transport resident to hospital for further evaluation, Resident #1 was placed on close supervision until Resident #1 was transported to hospital at 11:05 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy continued for 5 other (#2, #3, #4, #5, #6) residents at risk for wandering until 03/30/2023 when the facility door locking and alarm mechanism were adjusted. 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. Findings: Review of the facility's Elopement/Wandering Policy with revision date of February 2022 revealed in part: Elopement occurs when a resident who is incapable of adequately protecting themselves leaves the premises without necessary supervision to do so. Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed a readmit date of 01/31/2023 and diagnoses including but not limited to: major depressive disorder, unspecified mood disorder, insomnia, and dementia. Review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 02/07/2023 revealed in part, Resident #1 had a BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) score of 02 indicating severe cognitive impairment, wandering behavior occurred 1-3 days during 7 day look back period, and resident received antipsychotic and antidepressant medications for 7 of the 7 day look back period. Review of Resident #1's current physician orders revealed in part: 01/31/2023- Check for proper placement of wanderguard bracelet every shift (1:00 a.m. & 1:00 p.m.). 01/31/2023- Check for functioning of the security bracelet with use of transmitter tester daily (1:00 p.m.). Review of Resident #1's current Comprehensive Care Plan revealed Resident #1 was care planned for wandering and use of wander/elopement alarm with interventions including apply wanderguard bracelet and check placement every shift, observe function of wanderguard daily, redirect as needed, and consult MD as needed. Review of Resident #1's elopement risk assessment with start and end date of 02/13/2023 revealed Resident #1 was found to be at risk for elopement. Review of Resident #1's March 2023 progress notes revealed in part: 03/30/2023 at 1:13 p.m. late entry for 03/25/2023 by S3 LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse)- At approximately 8:20 p.m. A man opened front door to notify staff that resident was outside of door. Resident was secured by staff at approximately 8:21 p.m. Resident oppositional with staff while trying to return her in building. Approximately 8:30 p.m. Resident was securely returned to building. Close staff supervision in place for resident at this time. 03/25/2023 at 11:25 p.m. by S3 LPN- At 8:30 p.m. Resident escaped the grounds. Returned to facility safely. (This progress note was marked out in resident's medical record and replaced with the above late entry progress note.) 03/25/2023 at 11:14 p.m. late entry for 03/24/2023 by S3 LPN- During 7P to 7A shift on 03/24/2023, Writer and CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) noticed resident was pushing on front doors during staff rounds/medication pass. Upon approaching resident to redirect, resident pushed doors open and attempted to elope out of front door. Writer, CNA, and other nurse was able to redirect, bring resident back to room. Resident cursed staff and was oppositional during redirection. Brought to room by nurse and put to bed. Responsible Party and Nurse Practitioner notified. Progress note did not indicate an increase in supervision was put in place at this time. 03/22/2023 at 12:26 a.m. by S5 LPN- Behavior: Resident wandering in the halls, confused as to where she is. She was noted crying and when asked what was wrong she was difficult to understand. She repeatedly attempted to go outside unassisted by staff. Staff attempts to redirect her and after some time she finally agreed to go in her room. S6 NP (Nurse Practitioner) notified and gave an order for hydroxyzine 25mgm 1 cap twice a day as needed. Order noted and MAR (Medication Administration Record) adjusted. R2 Responsible Party notified of new order and gave the ok to give whatever needs to be, medication administered, will continue to monitor. During an observation on 04/03/2023 at 4:00 p.m. of facility surveillance video from 03/25/2023 at 7:38 p.m. revealed Resident #1 walking out facility's front door alone with wanderguard in place on left ankle. Further review of facility surveillance video from 03/25/2023 revealed no staff exited the building until 18 minutes after Resident #1. During an interview on 04/03/2023 at 1:30 p.m. S1 Administrator reported facility staff was notified via telephone call by a concerned community citizen of Resident #1 being outside the facility on 03/25/2023 at approximately 7:56 p.m. S1 Administrator reported staff were able to safely get Resident #1 back into the facility. S1 Administrator further reported once Resident #1 was back in the facility, staff assessed Resident #1, immediately notified S2 DON (Director of Nursing), Resident #1's daughter, and Resident #1's doctor of incident and S2 DON notified her immediately of incident. S1 Administrator reported order was received to transport resident to hospital for further evaluation, Resident #1 was placed on close supervision until Resident #1 was transported to hospital. During a telephone interview on 04/05/2023 at 1:20 p.m. S4 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) reported on 03/25/2023 when facility was notified Resident #1 was outside the facility, she went out the facility's front doors and got in her truck to go find Resident #1. S4 CNA reported once in her truck she pulled out of the facility's parking lot onto the two lane public road and saw Resident #1 down the road in front of an apartment complex. S4 CNA further reported Resident #1 was standing in the road leaning into a vehicle talking to an unknown man. S4 CNA reported she was able to get Resident #1 into her truck and drove Resident #1 to the entrance of the facility and assisted Resident #1 back into the facility. During a telephone interview on 04/03/2023 at 4:40 p.m. R1 Concerned Community Citizen reported on 03/25/2023 at approximately 8:00 p.m. he was driving down the two lane public road in which the nursing home is located on going to the store and saw Resident #1 on the two lane public road. R1 Concerned Community Citizen reported he stopped and made sure Resident #1 was safe because kids will drive fast on the road. R1 Concerned Community Citizen further reported Resident #1 was in the middle of the road two houses down from his father's house across from the pole with the transducer on it. R1 Concerned Community Citizen reported he called the facility to let them know Resident #1 was out of the nursing home. During an observation on 04/04/2023 at 12:10 p.m. surveyor observed the pole with a transducer down the road from the facility where R1 Concerned Citizen reported Resident #1 was standing. Surveyor was able to determine the pole was one tenth of a mile from the nursing home's parking lot. During an interview on 04/04/2023 at 11:10 a.m. S1 Administrator confirmed facility video did not show staff searching for Resident #1 or aware Resident #1 had exited the facility. S1 Administrator acknowledged when Resident #1 went out the front door and closed it the alarm would stop so staff did not respond to the brief alarm. S1 Administrator confirmed staff was unaware Resident #1 had left the building until staff was notified by a community citizen that Resident #1 was outside the facility. During an interview on 04/04/2023 at 11:15 a.m. S2 DON acknowledged members of the community blocked the streets surrounding the facility to stop traffic and protected Resident #1 from being hit by a car. S2 DON confirmed members of the community protected Resident #1 from harm. During an interview on 04/04/2023 at 12:45 p.m. R3 Technician with Medical Equipment Company reported prior to his company coming out and providing services to the facility on [DATE], when the front doors were pushed open an alarm would only sound until the door was closed and did not require a code to be entered to stop the alarm sound. During an interview on 04/04/2023 at 4:30 p.m. S1 Administrator confirmed staff did not know Resident #1 was not in the facility until staff was notified by a concerned community citizen who walked into the building to let staff know they saw a resident outside and another concerned community citizen called the facility to report a resident was outside the facility. S1 Administrator further confirmed staff could not have had eyes on Resident #1 the entire time Resident #1 was outside the building since they were not aware Resident #1 had left the building. During an interview on 04/04/2023 at 2:50 p.m. S7 CNA reported she had encounters with Resident #1 when Resident #1 was a resident at the facility. S7 CNA further reported Resident #1 required redirection because she would wander into other resident's rooms and would wander near the front door. S7 CNA reported she had witnessed Resident #1 attempt to go out facility doors in the past and resident was redirected by staff. During an interview on 04/04/2023 at 3:00 p.m. S8 LPN reported she observed Resident #1 wandering the facility and had redirected resident. S8 LPN reported all facility staff throughout the building will redirect a resident if they are wandering a hall that the resident does not reside on. During an interview on 04/05/2023 at 8:35 a.m. S9 CNA reported she had witnessed Resident #1 wandering and also witnessed Resident #1 in the past push on facility's door to get out. S9 CNA reported she witnessed Resident #1 being redirected by staff and reported staff will call to the nurse's station if a resident wanders to a hall they do not reside on and notify staff of resident's location. During an interview on 04/05/2023 at 8:55 a.m. S1 Administrator and S2 DON reported close supervision of a resident is defined as a resident being within sight of a staff member. S1 Administrator and S2 DON acknowledged residents who are at risk for self-harm, elopement, and/or violence are residents who require close supervision. Review of medical records revealed the following 5 residents who had impaired cognition and/or a diagnosis that may increase the risk of elopement: #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6. Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's medical record revealed a diagnosis of Dementia and Delusional Disorder, MDS dated [DATE] revealed BIMS score of 3 indicating severe cognitive impairment, set up assist for locomotion on and off unit, daily use of wander/elopement alarm and no wandering during 7 day look back period. Resident #3 Review of Resident #3's record revealed a diagnosis of Altered Mental Disorder, MDS dated [DATE] revealed BIMS score of 6 indicating severe cognitive impairment, supervision with setup help only for locomotion on and off unit, daily use of wander/elopement alarm and wandering occurred 1-3 days during 7 day look back period. Resident #4 Review of Resident #4's record revealed a diagnosis of Vascular Dementia, MDS dated [DATE] revealed BIMS score of 5 indicating severe cognitive impairment, supervision with setup help only for locomotion on and off unit, daily use of wander/elopement alarm and no wandering occurred during 7 day look back period. Resident #5 Review of Resident #5's record revealed a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, MDS dated [DATE] revealed BIMS score of 3 indicating severe cognitive impairment, one person assist with locomotion on and off unit, daily use of wander/elopement alarm and no wandering occurred during 7 day look back period. Resident #6 Review of Resident #6's record revealed a diagnosis of Dementia with psychotic disturbance, MDS dated [DATE] revealed BIMS score of 9 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, wheelchair required for locomotion on and off unit, daily use of wander/elopement alarm and no wandering occurred during 7 day look back period. On 03/25/2023, the facility implemented the following actions to correct the deficient practice with completion on 03/30/2023: 1. Resident #1 was placed on close supervision and sent to a local hospital for evaluation on 03/25/2023 and remains in hospital. 2. Daily census checks on each resident. 3. All residents assessed for elopement risk. 4. Staff in-services regarding: daily wanderguard checks to ensure proper function, recognizing exit seeking behaviors, close supervision of residents who wander or exhibit exit seeking behaviors, and reporting of exit seeking behaviors. 5. As of 03/30/2023, the facility front door requires a code to be keyed in to stop the door alarm when pushed open and the wanderguard detection range was widened. 6. Quality Assurance was conducted with the staff and medical director immediately following the incident and continues to evolve identifying areas of improvement including but not limited to hiring full time employees to monitor video cameras 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · 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 a resident elopement from the facility was reported to the ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident elopement from the facility was reported to the State Survey Agency within 24 hours in accordance with State law for 1 (#1) of 6 sampled residents (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6). Findings: Review of Facility's policy titled Elopement/Wandering-General Policy with revision date of February 2022 revealed in part, 4. Upon return of the resident to the facility: g. Notify regulatory agencies per state guidelines. Review of medical record revealed Resident #1 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to major depressive disorder, unspecified mood disorder, insomnia, depressive disorder, and dementia. Review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 02/07/2023 revealed in part, Resident #1 had a BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) score of 02 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Review of the facility's Incident Log revealed an elopement incident in regards to Resident #1 on 03/25/2023 at 8:31 p.m. in which staff found Resident #1 outside the facility after being informed by a concerned citizen of a resident being outside. Resident #1 was secured back in the facility and transported to hospital for further evaluation. Review of the facility's SIMS reports (State Incident Management System) from January 2023 to 04/03/2023 failed to reveal a SIMS report had been filed in regard to Resident #1's elopement which occurred on 03/25/2023. Observation on 04/03/2023 at 4:00 p.m. of facility surveillance video from 03/25/2023 at 7:38 p.m. revealed Resident #1 walking out facility's front door alone with wanderguard on left ankle. Further review of facility surveillance video from 03/25/2023 revealed no staff exited the building until 18 minutes after Resident #1. During a telephone interview on 04/03/2023 at 4:40 p.m. R1 Concerned Community Citizen reported on 03/25/2023 at approximately 8:00 p.m. he was driving down the two lane public road in which the nursing home is located on going to the store and saw Resident #1 on the two lane public road. R1 Concerned Community Citizen reported he stopped and made sure Resident #1 was safe because kids will drive fast on the road. R1 Concerned Community Citizen further reported Resident #1 was in the middle of the road two houses down from his father's house across from the pole with the transducer on it. R1 Concerned Community Citizen reported he called the facility to let them know Resident #1 was out of the nursing home. During an observation on 04/04/2023 at 12:10 p.m. surveyor observed the pole with a transducer down the road from the facility where R1 Concerned Community Citizen reported Resident #1 was standing. Surveyor was able to determine the pole was one tenth of a mile from the nursing home's parking lot. During a telephone interview on 04/05/2023 at 1:20 p.m. S4 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) reported on 03/25/2023 when facility was notified Resident #1 was outside the facility, she went out the facility's front doors and got in her truck to go find Resident #1. S4 CNA reported once in her truck she pulled out of the facility's parking lot onto the two lane public road and saw Resident #1 down the road in front of an apartment complex. S4 CNA further reported Resident #1 was standing in the road leaning into a vehicle talking to an unknown man. S4 CNA reported she was able to get Resident #1 into her truck and drove Resident #1 to the entrance of the facility and assisted Resident #1 back into the facility. During an interview on 04/03/2023 at 1:30 p.m. S1 Administrator reported facility staff was notified via a telephone call by a concerned community citizen of Resident #1 being outside the facility on 03/25/2023 at approximately 7:56 p.m. S1 Administrator further reported she was notified of the incident immediately on 03/25/2023 by S2 DON (Director of Nursing). S1 Administrator confirmed a SIMS report was not done.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • 25% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 23 points below Louisiana's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 3 life-threatening violation(s), $503,826 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 14 deficiencies on record, including 3 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $503,826 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Louisiana. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has 3 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Town & Country Health & Rehab's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Louisiana, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.

How is Town & Country Health & Rehab Staffed?

CMS rates TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 25%, compared to the Louisiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Town & Country Health & Rehab?

State health inspectors documented 14 deficiencies at TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB during 2023 to 2025. These included: 3 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 11 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Town & Country Health & Rehab?

TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 124 certified beds and approximately 99 residents (about 80% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in MINDEN, Louisiana.

How Does Town & Country Health & Rehab Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (25%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Town & Country Health & Rehab?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "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 Immediate Jeopardy citations.

Is Town & Country Health & Rehab Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Louisiana. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Town & Country Health & Rehab Stick Around?

Staff at TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 25%, the facility is 20 percentage points below the Louisiana average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly.

Was Town & Country Health & Rehab Ever Fined?

TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB has been fined $503,826 across 2 penalty actions. This is 13.2x the Louisiana average of $38,117. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.

Is Town & Country Health & Rehab on Any Federal Watch List?

TOWN & COUNTRY HEALTH & REHAB 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.