PROGRESSIVE CARE CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Progressive Care Center in Shreveport, Louisiana, has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average but not without its issues. It ranks #97 out of 264 facilities in the state, placing it in the top half, and #10 out of 22 in Caddo County, meaning only nine local options are better. The facility is stable, with the same number of issues reported in 2024 and 2025, but it has 15 concerns, all categorized as potential harm, without any critical or serious incidents. Staffing is a strength, with a rating of 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 31%, which is lower than the state average, suggesting that staff remain familiar with residents. However, the inspector found that the facility failed to adequately monitor a resident’s dialysis access site and did not assess certain residents for bed rail safety, which raises concerns about their adherence to care protocols. Overall, while there are strengths in staffing and no fines, families should weigh these against the identified concerns when considering this facility.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Louisiana
- #97/264
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Holding Steady
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 31% turnover. Near Louisiana's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Louisiana facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 27 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (31%)
17 points below Louisiana average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels.
The Bad
Above Louisiana average (2.4)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
15pts below Louisiana avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record
Feb 2025
4 deficiencies
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 record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure appropriate care and services consistent with professional ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 record reviews, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure, prior to installation and use of bed rails,...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs for 1 (#148) of 5 (#11, #32, #36, #148, #149) residents reviewed for u...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
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 maintain an infection prevention and control program...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical and verbal abuse by staff for 1 (#1) resident out of 3 (#1, #2, #3) sampled residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
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 resident received adequate supervision for 1 (#1) of 3 (#...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
2 deficiencies
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 observation, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person centere...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure an RN (Registered Nurse) was on duty for 8 consecutive hours per day, 7 days a week, for 4 days within FY (Fiscal Year) Quarter 4 2...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2023
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
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure grievances or complaints were addressed and investigated. The facility failed to follow their policy by ensuring a resident can fil...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident with a urinary catheter received ap...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored in a locked compartment on 1 of 2 medication carts observed.
Findings:
A record review of the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs for 2 (#4, #26) of 18 sam...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0568
(Tag F0568)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide quarterly personal funds statements to 3 (#3,#5, #6) of 3 re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure respiratory care was provided consistent with professional standards of practice by not following the facility's poli...
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 food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This had the potential to effect 30 residents who received trays...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Louisiana facilities.
- • 31% turnover. Below Louisiana's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Progressive's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns PROGRESSIVE CARE CENTER an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Louisiana, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Progressive Staffed?
CMS rates PROGRESSIVE CARE CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 31%, compared to the Louisiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Progressive?
State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at PROGRESSIVE CARE CENTER during 2023 to 2025. These included: 15 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Progressive?
PROGRESSIVE CARE CENTER is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 48 certified beds and approximately 40 residents (about 83% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in SHREVEPORT, Louisiana.
How Does Progressive Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, PROGRESSIVE CARE CENTER's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (31%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Progressive?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"
Is Progressive Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, PROGRESSIVE CARE CENTER has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Louisiana. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Progressive Stick Around?
PROGRESSIVE CARE CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 31%, 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 Progressive Ever Fined?
PROGRESSIVE CARE CENTER 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 Progressive on Any Federal Watch List?
PROGRESSIVE 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.