CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Chateau de Notre Dame Community Care Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. It ranks #181 out of 264 facilities in Louisiana, placing it in the bottom half, and #4 out of 11 in Orleans County, meaning there are only a few local options that are better. The facility's performance appears stable, with 39 reported issues, including 6 critical incidents, showing no improvement over the past year. Staffing is average, with a rating of 3 out of 5 stars, but the turnover rate is concerning at 52%, which is close to the state average. Alarmingly, the center has accumulated fines totaling $245,302, which is higher than 89% of other Louisiana facilities, indicating ongoing compliance problems. Specific incidents reported include the failure to protect residents from abuse, such as a cognitively impaired resident being left unsupervised and sexually abusing another resident. Additionally, the facility did not ensure adequate supervision for residents known to exhibit inappropriate behavior, which put vulnerable residents at risk. While some aspects, like staffing levels, are average, the serious issues related to resident safety and the high fines raise significant red flags for families considering this option.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Louisiana
- #181/264
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Holding Steady
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 52% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $245,302 in fines. Higher than 83% of Louisiana facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 13 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 39 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Louisiana average (2.4)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near Louisiana avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 39 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) accurately reflected medication orders for 1 (Resident #74) of 5 (Resident #11, Resident #53, R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an enteral feeding bag (bag that contains a ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to follow a physician's order for oxygen administration for 1 (Resident #52) of 1 (Resident #52) sampled residents reviewed f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0699
(Tag F0699)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to develop resident-specific approaches and implement a plan of care for a resident with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) for 1 (Reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2025
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 observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to properly secure a resident's wheelchair using the f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was competent in the facility's procedure for securing a resident's wheelchair ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure:
1. A resident was given a 30 day written notice before a ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0740
(Tag F0740)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide necessary behavioral health care needs for a resident who displayed passive suicidal ideation for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 (Resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's call light was within reach for 1 (Resident #64) of 4 (Resident #44, Resident #60, Resident #64, and Re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that a resident and/or a resident's responsible party was invited to the resident's care planning meeting for 1 (Resident #44) of 1 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited range of motion received appropriate treatment and services as identified in a therapy scre...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident was monitored for targeted behaviors for 1 (Resident # 138) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications....
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
2 deficiencies
2 IJ (2 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL
(K)
📢 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 multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record reviews, and observations, the facility:
1. Failed to ensure a resident (Resident #1), who was asse...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(K)
📢 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 multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record reviews, and observations, the facility:
1. Failed to ensure a resident (Resident #1), who was asse...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure over the counter eye drops were labeled with a resident's name. This deficient practice was identified for 1 medication...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to:
1. Ensure foods stored in the facility's kitchen refrigerator were dated;
2. Ensure expired beverages were not available for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an injury of unknown origin was reported immediately, but ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0776
(Tag F0776)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a stat (also known as immediate) x-ray was done in a timel...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews and record review, facility failed to ensure a physician and resident representative were notified immediately after an incident occurred for 1 (Resident #100) of 1 resident sample...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Assessments
(Tag F0636)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete and electronically submit a comprehensive assessment to CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) in a timely manner for 1 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0638
(Tag F0638)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete and electronically submit a quarterly assessment to CMS (Center for Medicare Service) in a timely manner for 2 (Resident #66 and R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to:
1. Ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) accurately refle...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide care and services to maintain or improve a res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to communicate the Registered Dietician (RD) recommendations to the Physician for 1 (Resident #43) of 5 (Resident #11, Resident #23, Resident #...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure an unauthorized person who was not employed by the facility d...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0808
(Tag F0808)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident received a therapeutic diet as orde...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews the facility failed to maintain their infection control program by the following:
1. Failed to have a male urinal contained in a plastic bag and i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed:
1. Ensure all food items were dated when opened;
2. Ensure perishable food items were not stored outside of acceptable tempera...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
8 deficiencies
3 IJ (3 facility-wide)
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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
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 observations, interviews, and record reviews; the facility failed to protect residents' right to be free from abuse for...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
Based on record reviews, interviews and observations, the facility failed to:
1. Ensure sufficient staff to supervise residents with known sexually inappropriate behaviors to prevent sexual abuse for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Based on record review, interview, and observations, the facility failed to be administered in a manner that used its resources to effectively and efficiently protect residents from abuse by failing t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to immediately notify a resident's Physician and Responsible Party(RP)/Medical Power of Attorney (POA) when Resident #1 sustained skin tears t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an incident of sexual abuse was reported to the state agency no later than 2 hours after the incident occurred for 2 (Resident #3 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Employment Screening
(Tag F0606)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Deficiency Text Not Available
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to have evidence that an incident that resulted in multiple discolorations to a residents bilateral arms was thoroughly investigated for 1 (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Deficiency Text Not Available
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0888
(Tag F0888)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure all staff were fully vaccinated for COVID-19. This deficient practice was identified for 4 staff [S7Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) completed annual competencies as required for 5 (S7CNA, S8CNA, S9CNA, S10CNA, S11CNA) of the...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0729
(Tag F0729)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to have documented evidence the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Registry was performed for 4 (S7CNA, S8CNA, S9CNA, S10CNA) of 5 personnel re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
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
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 6 life-threatening violation(s), $245,302 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 39 deficiencies on record, including 6 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $245,302 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Louisiana. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Chateau De Notre Dame Community's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER 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 Chateau De Notre Dame Community Staffed?
CMS rates CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 52%, compared to the Louisiana average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Chateau De Notre Dame Community?
State health inspectors documented 39 deficiencies at CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER during 2023 to 2025. These included: 6 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 33 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 Chateau De Notre Dame Community?
CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by COMMCARE CORPORATION, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 171 certified beds and approximately 147 residents (about 86% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana.
How Does Chateau De Notre Dame Community Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (52%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Chateau De Notre Dame Community?
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 Chateau De Notre Dame Community Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 6 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 Chateau De Notre Dame Community Stick Around?
CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 52%, which is 6 percentage points above the Louisiana average of 46%. Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Chateau De Notre Dame Community Ever Fined?
CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER has been fined $245,302 across 3 penalty actions. This is 6.9x the Louisiana average of $35,532. 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 Chateau De Notre Dame Community on Any Federal Watch List?
CHATEAU DE NOTRE DAME COMMUNITY CARE CENTER 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.