PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Princeton Place-Ruston has a Trust Grade of B+, indicating it is above average and recommended for families considering care options. It ranks #20 out of 264 facilities in Louisiana, placing it in the top half, and is the best option out of three in Lincoln County. The facility is improving, with issues decreasing from four in 2023 to just one in 2024. However, staffing is a concern, rated at 2 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 57%, which is average but suggests stability could be better. While they have no fines on record, which is positive, there were specific incidents where residents weren't properly monitored for medication side effects and where advance directives were not handled correctly, indicating areas needing attention. Overall, while there are strengths in the facility's rating and improvement trend, families should be aware of the staffing challenges and specific care concerns.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Louisiana
- #20/264
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 57% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Louisiana facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 15 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
11pts above Louisiana avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
9 points above Louisiana average of 48%
The Ugly 13 deficiencies on record
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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an alleged violation involving physical abuse witnessed by staff was reported immediately to the Administrator of the facility for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
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 the pharmacist must report any irregularities to the atten...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
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 that each resident was free from unnecessary medication use...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
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 residents receive treatment and care in accordance with pro...
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 F0777
(Tag F0777)
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 promptly notify the ordering physician/practitioner of diagnostic...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2022
8 deficiencies
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 resident's care plans were reviewed and revised based on the residents' status after each assessment for 3 (#29, #35, #45) of the 29 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living receive the necessary services to maintain good pers...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0678
(Tag F0678)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on policy review, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident's medical records reflected the resident's wishes for Advanced Directives for 1 (#5) of 1 (#5) residents r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
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 that residents who require dialysis receive su...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 interview and record review the facility failed to provide documentation that a resident or resident's representative were provided written Advance Directive information, and at the residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0638
(Tag F0638)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to complete a quarterly assessment using the quarterly review instrument specified by the State and approved by CMS (Centers for Medicare and M...
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments were electronically transmitted in a timely manner by failing to transmit the resident assessment within 14 day...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety by not ensuring 1) food storage c...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Grade B+ (80/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Louisiana.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Louisiana facilities.
- • 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • 57% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Princeton Place-Ruston's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Louisiana, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Princeton Place-Ruston Staffed?
CMS rates PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 57%, which is 11 percentage points above the Louisiana average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at Princeton Place-Ruston?
State health inspectors documented 13 deficiencies at PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON during 2022 to 2024. These included: 13 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Princeton Place-Ruston?
PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON 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 PARAMOUNT HEALTHCARE CONSULTANTS, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 123 certified beds and approximately 68 residents (about 55% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in RUSTON, Louisiana.
How Does Princeton Place-Ruston Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (57%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Princeton Place-Ruston?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can 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 high staff turnover rate and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Princeton Place-Ruston Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Louisiana. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Princeton Place-Ruston Stick Around?
Staff turnover at PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON is high. At 57%, the facility is 11 percentage points above the Louisiana average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Princeton Place-Ruston Ever Fined?
PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Princeton Place-Ruston on Any Federal Watch List?
PRINCETON PLACE-RUSTON 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.