SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Southern Hills Healthcare and Rehabilitation has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranking #243 out of 264 facilities in Louisiana places it in the bottom half, and #20 out of 22 in Caddo County suggests only one other local option is worse. The facility is worsening, with the number of issues increasing from 2 in 2024 to 13 in 2025. Staffing is rated average at 3 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 41%, which is better than the state average, but there is less RN coverage than 87% of facilities, raising concerns about oversight. Notably, there have been critical incidents, including a failure to protect a resident from sexual abuse and a lack of proper reporting to authorities, signifying serious lapses in safety and care standards. While there are some strengths in staffing stability, the overall situation is troubling, highlighting a need for families to carefully consider their options.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Louisiana
- #243/264
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 41% turnover. Near Louisiana's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $70,924 in fines. Higher than 61% of Louisiana facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 9 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 24 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 (41%)
7 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)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 24 deficiencies on record
May 2025
1 deficiency
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 record review, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident received adequate supervision to p...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2025
12 deficiencies
3 IJ (3 facility-wide)
CRITICAL
(L)
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 interviews and record reviews the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from sexual abuse and psyc...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(L)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
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 reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an alleged violation of sexual abuse was reported immediat...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(L)
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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled its resources to be used effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicab...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the care plan had been revised for 1 (Resident #2) of 18 sam...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident with a urinary catheter recei...
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 record review, observations, and interview, the facility failed to ensure appropriate treatment and services to prevent...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0868
(Tag F0868)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and an interview, the facility failed to ensure the required members were present for quarterly Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) meetings reviewed since last annual survey...
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 interview the facility failed to notify the resident's representative and physician after an incident...
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 reviews, observations, and interviews the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-center...
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 correct use and maintenance of bed rails by...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0730
(Tag F0730)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of personnel records and an interview the facility failed to ensure an annual performance review was completed for 1 (S11) of 5 (S11, S12, S13, S14, & S15) CNAs (Certified Nurse Assist...
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 record reviews, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control progra...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2024
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0638
(Tag F0638)
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 a discharge assessment was completed for 1 (#65) of 3 (#12, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
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 resident MDS (minimum data set) assessments were transmitted...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 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
Deficiency F0925
(Tag F0925)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program by having evidence of insects in 5 rooms (R-B, R-C, R-D, R-F, R-G) of 59 resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 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
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 review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medication use for 1 (#4...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
6 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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure each resident received an accurate assessment of the resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 review and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan had been developed and implemented for use of oxygen for 1(#53) out of a total of 28 sample...
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, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide residents necessary respiratory care and services in accordance with accepted professional standards of practice fo...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 residents who require dialysis receive such services, cons...
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, distribute and serve ice in a manner to prevent the possibility of contamination.
Findings:
Review of Policy titled Ice Distribution re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 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
Deficiency F0624
(Tag F0624)
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 a safe and orderly transfer from the facility was completed ...
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?"
- "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 41% turnover. Below Louisiana's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 4 life-threatening violation(s), Special Focus Facility, $70,924 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 24 deficiencies on record, including 4 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $70,924 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 Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION 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 Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation Staffed?
CMS rates SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 41%, compared to the Louisiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation?
State health inspectors documented 24 deficiencies at SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION during 2023 to 2025. These included: 4 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 20 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 Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation?
SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION 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 THE BEEBE FAMILY, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 101 certified beds and approximately 73 residents (about 72% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in SHREVEPORT, Louisiana.
How Does Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (41%) 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 Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation?
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?" "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "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 substantiated abuse finding on record.
Is Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). Inspectors have issued 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility is currently on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes nationwide). 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 Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation Stick Around?
SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION has a staff turnover rate of 41%, 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 Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation Ever Fined?
SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION has been fined $70,924 across 2 penalty actions. This is above the Louisiana average of $33,788. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.
Is Southern Hills Healthcare And Rehabilitation on Any Federal Watch List?
SOUTHERN HILLS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION is currently an SFF Candidate, meaning CMS has identified it as potentially qualifying for the Special Focus Facility watch list. SFF Candidates have a history of serious deficiencies but haven't yet reached the threshold for full SFF designation. The facility is being monitored more closely — if problems continue, it may be added to the official watch list. Families should ask what the facility is doing to address the issues that led to this status.