LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Legacy Nursing and Rehabilitation of Port Allen has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating a poor standing with significant concerns about the quality of care provided. They rank #220 out of 264 nursing homes in Louisiana, placing them in the bottom half of facilities statewide, but they are the only option in West Baton Rouge County. While the facility is showing signs of improvement, having reduced identified issues from 15 in 2024 to 6 in 2025, they still have a concerning track record, including $356,931 in fines, which is higher than 97% of Louisiana facilities. Staffing is a strength with a turnover rate of 39%, below the state average, but the overall staffing rating is only 1 out of 5 stars. Specific incidents of concern include a critical failure to ensure supervision for residents using the outdoor smoker's patio, which led to a resident's death, and a lack of communication regarding a significant change in another resident's medical status, indicating serious oversight in resident care.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Louisiana
- #220/264
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 39% turnover. Near Louisiana's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $356,931 in fines. Higher than 86% of Louisiana facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 14 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 36 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
-
Staff turnover below average (39%)
9 points below Louisiana average of 48%
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Louisiana average (2.4)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near Louisiana avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
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 36 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
5 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 F0658
(Tag F0658)
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 services were provided by the facility to me...
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medical record was complete and accurate by fa...
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 F0919
(Tag F0919)
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 there was a functioning call system to allow...
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
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident received necessary respirator...
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 F0700
(Tag F0700)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure correct installation, use, and maintenance ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure alleged violations involving verbal abuse were reported to...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect and di...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents call lights were within reach for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
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 promote and facilitate residents' self-determination through supp...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out ADLs...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible by failing to ensure a padded wall was pro...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident was provided a safe, clean, and comfortable interior by failing to ensure necessary housekeeping and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to transmit MDS assessments in the required timeframe for 8 of 8 (#11, #12, #22, #24, #34, #45, #53, #110) residents reviewed for resident a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure resident's MDS assessments accurately reflected the resident's Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) status for 2 (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to coordinate assessments with the resident's Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level II by failing to incorporate PASARR...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
6 deficiencies
3 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
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Someone could have died · 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 nursing staff communicated a significant change in status ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to a resident received treatment and care in accordance with profess...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Administration
(Tag F0835)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled it use its resources effec...
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
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
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 plan of care was developed and implemented for 5 (#3, #R1...
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure completed care was documented correctly in resident's reco...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure nurse staffing data, including resident census, and total number and actual hours worked for licensed and unlicensed nursing staff, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
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
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's physician and responsible party were notified ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of sexual abuse was reported to the administra...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2023
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of physical abuse was reported to the adminis...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with dignity and re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure:
1. CNA staff notified the nurse of a resident's change in ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain a safe, functional, and sanitary environme...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plan and furnish services t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #35
Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which inc...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
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 1 (#51) of 3 (#51, #56, and #95) residents re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 11 (#22, #24, #35, #40, #41, #52, #60,...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and prepare food under sanitary conditions by failing to ensure:
1. Food was properly stored in the walk-in cooler and...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
3 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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility neglected to provide needed services to residents by failing...
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 observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to be administered in a manner, which enabled it to us...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure alleged violations of neglect were reported immediately to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
1 deficiency
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
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement written policies and procedures to establish how staff would communicate and coordinate situations of abuse, neglect...
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
- • 39% turnover. Below Louisiana's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 5 life-threatening violation(s), $356,931 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 36 deficiencies on record, including 5 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $356,931 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 Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN 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 Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen Staffed?
CMS rates LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 39%, compared to the Louisiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. RN turnover specifically is 60%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen?
State health inspectors documented 36 deficiencies at LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN during 2022 to 2025. These included: 5 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 31 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 Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen?
LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by LEGACY NURSING & REHABILITATION, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 125 certified beds and approximately 115 residents (about 92% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in PORT ALLEN, Louisiana.
How Does Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (39%) 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 Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen?
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 you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 5 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 Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen Stick Around?
LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN has a staff turnover rate of 39%, which is about average for Louisiana nursing homes (state average: 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 Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen Ever Fined?
LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN has been fined $356,931 across 2 penalty actions. This is 9.7x the Louisiana average of $36,648. 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 Legacy Nursing And Rehabilitation Of Port Allen on Any Federal Watch List?
LEGACY NURSING AND REHABILITATION OF PORT ALLEN 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.