Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around December 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Landmark Nursing Center Hammond during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Unlabeled food was found stored in a resident-use refrigerator and freezer, including multiple prepared items, dairy products, sauces, and frozen meals. The facility policy required visitor-brought food to be sealed and labeled with the resident's name, contents, and date, but surveyors found numerous items without names or dates, and the DON and ADM both confirmed the items should have been labeled.
A resident with gastrostomy status, dysphagia, and CHF had orders for continuous tube feeding formula and water flushes, but the pump tubing was placed on the wrong sides of the pump. As observed by surveyors and confirmed by an LPN and the DON, the formula was not infusing while water flushes were running at the wrong rate.
A facility failed to accurately code a resident's MDS regarding restraints and alarms, and hospice services. The resident had a security bracelet, which was not reflected in the MDS, and was incorrectly coded as receiving hospice services, despite no physician order for such services. Staff confirmed these inaccuracies during interviews.
A resident with a history of falls and moderate cognitive impairment had a care plan intervention to turn her bed against the wall after a fall. Despite returning from the hospital after surgery for a hip injury, the intervention was not implemented until several days later. Staff interviews confirmed the delay, and observations verified the bed was not repositioned until much later, indicating a failure to follow the care plan.
The facility failed to effectively use its Infection Control and Prevention Program, leading to the spread of infections among residents. The infection preventionist nurse did not surveil or isolate clusters of rashes, later identified as potentially transmittable skin infections. Additionally, staff did not adhere to Enhanced Barrier Precautions, reusing gowns without laundering and failing to use proper disposal methods. These deficiencies resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation when multiple residents developed rashes consistent with scabies, and appropriate contact isolation precautions were not implemented.
The facility failed to implement effective infection control measures, resulting in a scabies outbreak among residents. Multiple residents developed similar rashes, but the facility did not place them on Contact Isolation Precautions. Staff did not adhere to Enhanced Barrier Precautions, reusing gowns without laundering them. The infection preventionist and DON were aware of the issue but did not take timely action, leading to an Immediate Jeopardy situation.
A resident with pruritus and a skin disorder did not receive Mupirocin 2% cream as ordered due to incorrect entry of the medication order. The cream was prescribed to be applied twice daily and as needed, but was entered as a PRN order, leading to missed scheduled doses. Staff interviews confirmed the error and the resulting failure to administer the medication correctly.
The facility did not post daily nurse staffing data, including actual hours worked by RNs, LPNs, and CNAs, as required by policy. Observations and interviews confirmed that staffing sheets for several days lacked this information, potentially affecting 139 residents.
Unlabeled Food Stored in Resident Refrigerator
Penalty
Summary
Food was not stored under sanitary conditions in Refrigerator A because multiple food items kept in the unit refrigerator and freezer were not properly labeled with the resident's name and date, despite the facility policy requiring food brought in by visitors to be in a leak-proof sealed container labeled with the resident's name, contents, and date. On 01/21/2026 at 8:40 a.m., surveyors observed a sign on Refrigerator A stating resident use and asking for name, room number, and date, but found numerous unlabeled items in the freezer and refrigerator, including ice cream, frozen meals, sliced cheddar cheese, fried chicken with rice and a roll, a lunchbox, yogurt, smoked sausage, whipped topping, maroon containers, a grocery bag with sausage, red food in a plastic container, mayo, a chocolate shake, ketchup, BBQ sauce, sliced roasted turkey with a packed-on date of 07/08/2025, cake, and two berry yogurts with an expiration date of 03/19/2025. During an interview at 9:02 a.m., S2DON observed the food items in Refrigerator A and confirmed they were not labeled with a date or name and should have been. During a later interview at 1:39 p.m., S1ADM stated housekeeping was responsible for monitoring and cleaning Refrigerator A and confirmed the items should have been labeled with a name and date but were not. The report identified that this deficient practice had the potential to affect 131 residents who were capable of storing and consuming food in the facility's unit refrigerators.
Incorrect Tube Feeding Pump Setup
Penalty
Summary
Resident #67, who was admitted with diagnoses including gastrostomy status, dysphagia following cerebral infarction, and unspecified diastolic congestive heart failure, had physician orders for continuous enteral feeding at 70 mL/hr and continuous water flushes at 45 mL/hr. The facility’s policy stated that all tube feedings would be administered in accordance with physician’s orders. During observation, the tube feeding pump was set up incorrectly: the feeding formula bag tubing was loaded through the water flush side of the pump and set at 0 mL/hr, while the water flush bag tubing was loaded through the feeding formula side of the pump and set at 70 mL/hr. An LPN observed these findings and confirmed the tubing was placed on the wrong sides of the pump, resulting in the tube feeding formula not infusing while water flushes were infusing at 70 mL/hr. The DON confirmed the nurse starting the tube feeding pump should ensure the tubing was inserted appropriately and administered at the ordered rate.
Inaccurate MDS Coding for Resident's Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflected the status of a resident. Specifically, the MDS for a resident was inaccurately coded regarding the use of restraints and alarms, as well as the provision of hospice services. The resident had a security bracelet as part of their care plan, which was not reflected in the MDS, and there was no physician order for hospice services, although the MDS indicated otherwise. Interviews with staff confirmed these inaccuracies, as the resident had never received hospice services and should have been coded for having a security bracelet.
Failure to Implement Fall Prevention Intervention
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement a care plan intervention for a resident identified as having a potential for further falls due to lack of coordination. The resident, who was moderately cognitively impaired, had a history of falls and was admitted with diagnoses including unsteadiness on feet and orthopedic aftercare. Following a fall on January 6, 2025, an intervention was added to the resident's care plan to turn her bed against the wall to prevent further falls. However, this intervention was not implemented until January 15, 2025, despite the resident returning from the hospital on January 10, 2025, after surgery for a hip injury sustained from the fall. Interviews with facility staff, including a CNA, LPN, ADON, and DON, confirmed the delay in implementing the care plan intervention. The ADON, responsible for adding and implementing fall interventions, acknowledged the oversight and confirmed that the intervention should have been in place upon the resident's return from the hospital. Observations made on January 14 and 15, 2025, verified that the bed was not positioned against the wall until January 15, 2025, indicating a lapse in following the care plan designed to mitigate the resident's fall risk.
Inadequate Infection Control and Surveillance
Penalty
Summary
The administration of the facility failed to effectively utilize its Infection Control and Prevention Program, leading to the development and transmission of infections among residents. Specifically, the facility did not surveil or isolate known clusters of rashes among five residents, which were later identified as potentially transmittable skin infections. The infection preventionist nurse, responsible for monitoring possible infections, did not implement necessary surveillance and tracking for these rashes, resulting in a failure to recognize the clustering and increasing rate of infection. The facility also failed to ensure that staff adhered to proper infection control practices. Four staff members did not follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) when providing care to a resident. The infection preventionist nurse confirmed that gowns used for EBP were being reused without laundering, contrary to the facility's policy. Gowns were not removed before exiting the resident's room, and the proper receptacles for disposing of these gowns were not used, further compromising infection control measures. The deficient practices resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation when multiple residents presented with similar rashes, which were consistent with scabies. Despite the awareness of the situation by the Director of Nursing and other staff, appropriate contact isolation precautions were not implemented. The failure to identify and manage the rashes as potentially transmittable conditions led to the spread of infection among residents, highlighting significant lapses in the facility's infection control protocols.
Inadequate Infection Control Leads to Scabies Outbreak
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement an effective infection prevention and control program, leading to the development and transmission of infections among residents. Specifically, the facility did not establish a system to control and prevent the spread of transmittable infections, as evidenced by the cases of five residents who developed similar rashes. These rashes were later identified as potentially transmittable skin infections, such as scabies, but the facility did not take appropriate precautions to prevent their spread. The infection preventionist nurse and the Director of Nursing were aware of the similar rashes among residents but failed to place them on Contact Isolation Precautions, which contributed to the spread of the infection. The report highlights several instances where staff did not adhere to proper infection control practices. For example, a resident with a persistent rash was not placed on Contact Isolation Precautions despite being treated for scabies. Interviews with staff, including licensed practical nurses and nurse practitioners, confirmed that residents with similar rashes were not isolated, and the infection preventionist nurse did not identify the potential for these rashes to spread. Additionally, the facility's policy on Enhanced Barrier Precautions was not followed, as staff reused gowns without laundering them and did not dispose of them properly within the resident's room. The facility's failure to adhere to its own infection control policies and procedures, as well as guidelines from the CDC, resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation. This situation was identified when multiple residents presented with similar rashes, and the facility did not take timely action to prevent the spread of infection. The lack of surveillance and timely analysis of infection trends contributed to the ongoing transmission of infections among residents, posing a risk to the health and safety of all residents in the facility.
Medication Administration Error Due to Incorrect Order Entry
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure medications were administered to meet the needs of each resident by not correctly entering and administering medication orders for a resident with pruritus and a skin disorder. The resident was prescribed Mupirocin 2% cream to be applied twice daily and as needed. However, the medication administration record (MAR) did not have scheduled times for administration, leading to inconsistent application of the medication. The MAR showed that the medication was administered at irregular intervals, and some scheduled doses were missed. Interviews with staff revealed that the medication order was incorrectly entered as a PRN (as needed) order instead of having separate entries for scheduled and PRN administration. This error resulted in the resident not receiving the medication as ordered. The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) responsible for entering the order confirmed the mistake and acknowledged that the morning dose on a specific date was not administered. The Director of Nursing (DON) also confirmed the error in the medication order entry, which led to the resident not receiving the scheduled doses.
Failure to Post Daily Nurse Staffing Data
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that nurse staffing data, including actual hours worked for both licensed and unlicensed nursing staff, was posted daily in a prominent location accessible to residents and visitors. This deficiency was identified through observation, interviews, and record review. The facility's policy, dated October 2022, mandates that actual hours worked by registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, licensed vocational nurses, and certified nurse aides be documented and posted daily. However, during an observation on June 17, 2024, it was found that the staffing data sheets for June 14 to June 16, 2024, lacked documentation of the actual hours worked by the nursing staff. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (S2DON) and the Administrator (S1ADM) confirmed the absence of required information on the staffing data sheets. Both acknowledged that the sheets should have included the actual hours worked by the nursing staff, but they did not. This oversight had the potential to affect any of the 139 residents residing in the facility.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 33 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Hammond
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Belle Maison Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, Llc | 0.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Ponchatoula Community Care Center | 1.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Hammond Nursing Home | 1.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Heritage Healthcare Of Hammond | 1.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| The Lodge At Tangi Pines | 18.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Landmark Nursing Center Hammond.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.