Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around February 2027
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 Adept Nursing & Rehab Of Gretna during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Surveyors identified that the facility exceeded the acceptable medication error rate when three errors occurred out of 25 opportunities. One resident with edema missed a scheduled morning dose of torsemide 80 mg because the drug was unavailable in the medication cart, not in the medication bank, and had not yet arrived from the pharmacy. Another resident, ordered sucralfate 1 g before meals and at bedtime, received the medication after eating lunch. A third resident, ordered finasteride 5 mg once daily at 8:00 PM for urinary retention, received the dose in the early afternoon instead of at the scheduled time. Staff, including an MA, an LPN, and the DON, confirmed that these missed and wrong-time administrations constituted medication errors under facility policy.
Respiratory care was not provided as ordered for several residents. A cognitively intact resident using a Trilogy NIV had no documented device settings or record of when the mask and tubing were last changed, another resident ordered for continuous oxygen titration had only daily SpO2 checks instead of more frequent monitoring, and two residents had oxygen tubing that was not dated. The DON confirmed the missing settings, limited SpO2 monitoring, and lack of tubing dating.
A resident who was unable to make themselves understood and required extensive assistance with mobility and ADLs was admitted with a documented sacral pressure ulcer. Facility policy required that wound care be provided per physician orders and that a physician be notified to obtain treatment orders when none were present. Despite this, the resident’s records showed no physician order for treatment of the sacral ulcer, and an RN confirmed that the physician had not been notified and that no treatment order had been obtained.
A resident's advance directive was not updated in the medical record. The resident's advance directive information showed a change from wanting CPR to not wanting CPR, but the CCP still listed the resident as Full Code. The resident had a BIMS score of 13, required assistance with multiple ADLs, and was receiving oxygen therapy. An LPN confirmed the discrepancy between the advance directive information and the CCP.
Psychotropic medication monitoring deficiencies were identified for multiple residents. One resident with bipolar disorder, MDD with psychotic symptoms, and GAD received Seroquel and sertraline, but the EMR, MAR, and TAR did not show specific target behaviors or side effect monitoring despite behavioral concerns being listed in the care plan. Another resident with schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, received multiple psychotropic medications, but no target behaviors were documented, and the DON confirmed this. The report also noted missing AIMS testing for one resident and lack of sleep pattern monitoring for hypnotic use in three residents.
A resident’s CCP was not revised to reflect the correct advance directive status after Hospice admission and a DNR order were obtained. The resident had a BIMS score of 14, required extensive to total ADL assistance, and was receiving Hospice services, but the CCP still listed full code and advance directive entries showing no change. The SW confirmed the CCP should have been updated to no code after the facility received the DNR paperwork and Hospice documents.
Failure to implement an ordered fluid restriction was identified for a resident with moderate cognitive impairment. The MAR documented a 1500 ml fluid restriction, but the CCP and DMT did not include the restriction, and the order was not divided between Dietary and Nursing Services per policy. The resident was observed with water and soda, stated the restriction was not being enforced, a NA was unaware of the order, and the DON confirmed it was not implemented.
A pharmacist identified that a resident receiving Xarelto was also ordered ibuprofen, an NSAID, and recommended discontinuing the ibuprofen because anticoagulants combined with NSAIDs can increase bleeding risk. The physician disagreed with the recommendation, but the chart did not include a clear clinical rationale for continuing ibuprofen, and the DON confirmed the rationale was not documented.
The facility did not obtain food from approved or satisfactory sources and failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food according to professional standards.
The facility did not ensure that water temperatures for bathing and showering remained at or below 110°F, as required to prevent accidents. Multiple logs and direct observations showed water temperatures in excess of this limit in several bathhouses and tubs. Over twenty cognitively impaired residents regularly used these bathing areas, and staff confirmed the facility lacked a specific policy for tub bathing.
The facility did not establish or maintain an infection prevention and control program as required, resulting in a deficiency identified by surveyors.
Staff failed to promptly assess, monitor, and implement interventions for two residents at risk for pressure ulcers, resulting in the development and worsening of pressure injuries. In both cases, wounds were not measured or treated in a timely manner, and required interventions were not initiated according to facility policy.
The facility did not provide bathing services according to the stated preferences of four residents, each of whom required significant assistance and had documented requests for two baths or showers per week. Despite varying cognitive and physical needs, these residents received fewer baths or showers than preferred, contrary to facility policy supporting resident self-determination, as confirmed by the DON.
Staff failed to promptly notify the medical practitioner of new pressure ulcers for two residents, resulting in a lack of timely treatment orders. One cognitively intact resident developed a stage 3 pressure ulcer that was not reported for further treatment, while another resident's wounds were not communicated to the practitioner until the day of the survey, contrary to facility policy.
The facility did not post daily nurse staffing information as required by its policy and federal guidelines. Observations showed that the necessary details, including the facility name, date, census, and staff hours, were missing. The DON confirmed the oversight, affecting all 44 residents.
The facility was found to have multiple environmental deficiencies in resident rooms, including scrapes on walls, stained floors, cracked sinks, and non-functioning lights. These issues were confirmed by the Maintenance Director, who noted that no active work orders were in place to address them.
The facility failed to secure residents' medications and treatments in medication carts, as observed on multiple occasions. Unlocked and unattended medication carts were found in various locations, and a Registered Nurse left a treatment cart unlocked while performing treatments. The facility's policy mandates that all drugs and biologicals be stored in locked compartments, which was not followed.
The facility failed to obtain treatment orders for pressure ulcers for two residents. One resident had a pressure ulcer on the left lateral foot, and another had an unstageable pressure wound on the left heel. Observations and interviews confirmed the absence of treatment orders for both residents.
Medication Administration Errors Exceeding 5% Threshold
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a medication error rate below 5%, with surveyors identifying 3 errors out of 25 opportunities, resulting in a 12% error rate. Facility policy required medications to be administered according to physician orders, manufacturer specifications, and accepted professional standards, and specified that missed doses and wrong-time administrations are medication errors. For one resident with an order for torsemide 80 mg by mouth in the morning for edema, observation showed the medication was unavailable at the scheduled administration time. The medication aide stated they would notify the charge nurse to obtain the drug from the facility’s medication bank. The LPN later confirmed that torsemide 80 mg was not available in the medication bank, the pharmacy had been notified, and by the afternoon the medication had still not arrived, resulting in a missed dose, which was acknowledged as a medication error. Another resident had a physician’s order for sucralfate 1 g by mouth before meals and at bedtime. Observation showed the medication aide administered the sucralfate after the resident had already eaten lunch, and the aide confirmed it should have been given before the meal. A third resident had an order for finasteride 5 mg by mouth once daily, scheduled for 8:00 PM. Observation revealed that the medication aide administered the finasteride at 1:00 PM instead of the ordered 8:00 PM time. The DON confirmed that this medication should have been administered at 8:00 PM and that both missed doses and medications given at the wrong time are considered medication errors under facility policy.
Respiratory Care Deficiencies With Ventilator Settings, Oxygen Monitoring, and Tubing Dating
Penalty
Summary
Safe and appropriate respiratory care was not provided for multiple residents who were receiving oxygen therapy or noninvasive ventilation. The facility’s policy required noninvasive ventilation to be provided according to practitioner orders and current standards of practice, with equipment replaced routinely and face mask and tubing changed every 3 months. The oxygen administration policy required oxygen to be administered according to orders and care plans, with monitoring of oxygen saturation levels as ordered and oxygen tubing and mask/cannula changed weekly and as needed, with equipment dated when changed. For one resident who was cognitively intact and receiving a Trilogy noninvasive ventilator at bedtime with heated humidity and 4 liters of oxygen bled in, the order summary did not include settings for the Trilogy device or orders for replacement of the face mask and tubing. The DON confirmed the settings were not obtained from the practitioner and the facility had no record of when the face mask and tubing were last changed. For another resident who was cognitively intact and had an order for oxygen titrated from 2 to 4 liters to keep oxygen saturations greater than 90% continuously via nasal cannula, the record showed only daily oxygen saturation monitoring. The DON confirmed the staff would need to check oxygen saturations more than once a day and at least shiftly to ensure the resident was receiving the correct flow to maintain the ordered saturation level. Two additional residents had oxygen tubing that was not dated. One resident with COPD, obstructive sleep apnea, respiratory failure with hypoxia, and dependence on supplemental oxygen had orders for oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula to keep oxygen saturation above 88% and oxygen at 1 liter per minute at night; observations showed oxygen in place, but the tubing had no date marking when it was changed. Another resident with severe cognitive impairment and total dependence for all ADLs had an order for oxygen via nasal cannula at 4 liters per minute, and observations showed the tubing was not dated. The DON confirmed the oxygen tubing was not dated and should be dated when changed, changed weekly, and documented on the TAR.
Failure to Obtain Treatment Orders for Identified Pressure Ulcer
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to obtain physician orders for treatment of an identified pressure ulcer. Facility policy on Wound Treatment Management, dated 08-2025, required that wound treatments be provided in accordance with physician orders, including cleansing method, dressing type, and frequency, and that in the absence of treatment orders the licensed nurse would notify the physician to obtain such orders. Record review showed that a resident, admitted on a specified date and assessed via the MDS as unable to make themselves understood and needing partial to total assistance with mobility, ADLs, and toileting, had a sacral pressure ulcer measuring 2.0 by 1.0 cm documented on an admission/readmission assessment dated 01-09-2026. However, review of the resident’s Order Summary printed on 03-02-2026 revealed no treatment order for the sacral pressure ulcer. In an interview, an RN confirmed the resident had a sacral pressure ulcer, that the physician had not been notified, and that an order for treatment had not been obtained as required.
Advance Directive Not Updated in Medical Record
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to update advance directives in the medical record for 1 of 17 residents sampled. The facility policy titled Communication of Code Status stated that residents' rights to request, refuse, or discontinue treatment and to formulate an advance directive would be honored, and that when an order was written regarding the presence or absence of an advance directive, the directions would be clearly documented in designated sections of the medical record, including Full Code and Do Not Resuscitate status. Resident 1's MDS showed a BIMS score of 13, indicating cognitive intactness, and the resident required varying levels of assistance with dressing, hygiene, bed mobility, toileting, bathing, and transfers, and was receiving oxygen therapy. The resident's advance directive information showed a change from wishing CPR to not wanting CPR, but the CCP printed on 03-02-2026 still listed the resident as Full Code. An interview with an LPN confirmed there was a discrepancy between the advance directive information and the CCP and that there should not have been one.
Psychotropic Medication Monitoring Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to identify and monitor specific target behaviors and side effects for psychotropic medication use for two residents, failed to ensure AIMS testing had been completed for one resident, and failed to monitor and evaluate sleep patterns for the continued use of hypnotic medications for three residents. The deficiency was identified during review of five residents selected from a census of 40, and the cited issue involved unnecessary medication use under 175 NAC 12-006.05(G). One resident had diagnoses including bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder with psychotic symptoms, and generalized anxiety disorder. The resident’s record showed orders for Seroquel in divided doses for anxiety and delusions, along with sertraline for major depressive disorder. The care plan identified psychotropic drug use and behavioral concerns such as refusing caregiver suggestions, arguing, making false accusations, and making racially inappropriate statements, with interventions to monitor for effectiveness and side effects. However, review of the EMR, MAR, and TAR showed no specific side effects identified and no behavior monitoring documented related to the antipsychotic and antidepressant use. Another resident had a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, and records showed use of multiple psychotropic medications, including buspirone, clonazepam, duloxetine, escitalopram, and quetiapine. The care plan for psychotropic drug use did not list any target behaviors. The DON confirmed there were no target behaviors documented for this resident. The report also states that AIMS testing had not been completed for Resident 6 and that sleep patterns were not monitored and evaluated for the continued use of hypnotic medications for three residents, but no additional details were provided in the report for those findings.
Care Plan Not Updated for DNR Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to review and revise Resident 8’s Comprehensive Care Plan to reflect the correct advance directive status after the resident was admitted to Hospice services and a Do Not Resuscitate order was obtained. Resident 8 had an original admission date of 06/08/2023 and was re-admitted to Medicaid Hospice Services on 2/19/26. The significant change MDS dated 2/27/26 showed a BIMS score of 14, indicating the resident was cognitively intact, and documented that the resident required extensive to total assistance with activities of daily living and was receiving Hospice services. Record review showed Hospice admission documents dated 2/19/26 identified a diagnosis of Cerebral Infarction, and a DNR order document dated 2/19/26 was signed by Resident 8’s legally authorized representative, who indicated that the resident did want a DNR order. Physician orders also included a Do Not Resuscitate order dated 2/19/26. However, the Comprehensive Care Plan dated January 2026 still stated that the resident was full code and included advance directive entries indicating no change in advance directive status. During interview on 03/04/2026, the facility Social Worker confirmed that the care plan had not been updated to include a no code status and should have been changed after the resident went on Hospice and the facility received the DNR order and signed Hospice documents.
Failure to Implement Ordered Fluid Restriction
Penalty
Summary
Failure to implement a fluid restriction was identified for one resident with an order for 1500 ml of fluids per day. Record review showed the resident had a BIMS score of 12, indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and required extensive assistance with toileting, bathing, and lower body dressing, as well as limited assistance with upper body dressing, bed mobility, and transfers. The resident's MAR for February 2026 documented the fluid restriction, but the restriction was not divided between Dietary and Nursing Services as described in the facility policy. The resident's comprehensive care plan did not include the fluid restriction, and the dietary meal ticket also lacked information about the restriction or how much fluid the resident should receive with each meal. During observation, the resident was seen with a cup of water at lunch and later had a medium soda and a water pitcher that was half gone. The resident stated the fluid restriction was not being enforced, a NA said they were not aware of the restriction, and the DON confirmed the fluid restriction was not implemented and should have been.
Missing Rationale for Continued Ibuprofen Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a rationale was documented for the continued use of ibuprofen for Resident 43, despite a pharmacist identifying that the resident was receiving Xarelto and ibuprofen, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. The facility’s medication regimen review policy required a licensed pharmacist to review each resident’s drug regimen monthly, including the medical chart, and to document any irregularities or the absence of irregularities. The pharmacist’s recommendation to the prescriber stated that anticoagulants in combination with NSAIDs can increase the risk of bleeding and recommended discontinuing ibuprofen. Record review showed Resident 43 had a BIMS score of 15/15 with no behaviors noted and was independent with most activities of daily living, requiring partial/moderate assistance only with showering/bathing. Physician orders included ibuprofen 200 mg capsules, with one order for 400 mg by mouth twice daily for pain and another order for 400 mg by mouth every 12 hours as needed for pain. The physician response to the pharmacist’s recommendation was marked disagree, and the prescriber’s comment stated, "Take 400mg Ibuprofen every 12 hours as needed for pain," but the DON confirmed in interview that the prescriber had not documented the rationale for ibuprofen.
Failure to Follow Food Procurement and Handling Standards
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to procure food from sources that are approved or considered satisfactory and did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards. This deficiency was identified during the survey process, indicating that the facility did not meet regulatory requirements for food safety and handling. No additional details about specific residents, staff, or events are provided in the report.
Failure to Maintain Safe Bathing Water Temperatures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that bathing and showering water temperatures did not exceed 110 degrees Fahrenheit, as required to prevent potential accidents. Multiple records and logs reviewed showed that water temperatures in various bathhouses and tubs consistently ranged from 111.4 to 116.4 degrees Fahrenheit, exceeding the facility's stated maximum safe bathing temperature. Observations conducted with the Regional Lead Maintenance confirmed that water temperatures in both the 100-hall and 200-hall bathhouses were above the 110-degree threshold. The facility's policies referenced a safe water temperature range of 98.6 to 120 degrees Fahrenheit, but staff interviews confirmed that the maximum for bathing should be 110 degrees Fahrenheit, and this standard was not met. The Resident Listing Report indicated that out of 45 residents, 22 were cognitively impaired and bathed in the bathhouses where the elevated water temperatures were recorded. Staff interviews confirmed that these residents, due to cognitive impairment, would be particularly vulnerable to the effects of excessively hot water. The facility did not have a policy specific to bathing in a tub, and the maintenance staff was responsible for checking and logging water temperatures, which were found to be above the safe limit on multiple occasions.
Failure to Implement Infection Prevention and Control Program
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide and implement an infection prevention and control program. This deficiency was identified during the survey process, indicating that the required measures to prevent and control infections were not established or maintained as per regulatory standards. The report notes the absence of a comprehensive infection prevention and control program but does not provide further details regarding specific actions, inactions, or events, nor does it mention any particular residents or staff involved.
Failure to Prevent and Manage Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to evaluate, monitor, and implement timely interventions for pressure ulcer prevention and wound healing for two residents. One resident, admitted with a right hip fracture and existing skin issues including a surgical incision, maceration to the sacrum, and redness on the left heel, was assessed as at risk for pressure ulcers and required pressure-relieving surfaces. Despite these risks, there was no evidence that staff implemented interventions to prevent further skin breakdown on the left heel. The resident subsequently developed a stage 3 pressure ulcer on the left heel, which worsened over time. Treatment orders were not obtained promptly, and wound care was not initiated until several days after the ulcer was identified, resulting in a decline in the wound's condition. Another resident, with moderate cognitive impairment and extensive care needs, was also identified as at risk for pressure ulcers and had interventions in place on the care plan, such as regular repositioning and pressure-reducing surfaces. However, an open area was noted on the left side of the back, and later, open wounds were observed on both the left back and sacrum. There was no documentation of wound resolution, no treatment orders for these wounds, and the wounds had not been measured or assessed as required. Staff confirmed that these wounds had not been properly evaluated or treated. The facility's own policy requires a systematic approach to pressure injury prevention and management, including prompt assessment, intervention, and monitoring. However, in both cases, staff did not follow these protocols, resulting in unaddressed and worsening pressure ulcers. The deficiencies were confirmed through record review, staff interviews, and direct observation.
Failure to Honor Resident Bathing Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide bathing services in accordance with the preferences of four residents, as identified through interviews and record reviews. Each resident had documented preferences for receiving two baths or showers per week, as indicated in their care plans or preference forms. However, facility records for March and April 2025 showed that these residents did not receive the number of baths or showers they preferred. For example, one resident with severe cognitive impairment and requiring total assistance for bathing received only five baths over an eight-week period, instead of the expected sixteen. Another resident, who was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance, received only three baths over a five-week period, instead of the expected ten. Similar discrepancies were found for the other two residents, with one resident refusing a bath on one occasion, but otherwise not receiving the preferred number of showers. The residents involved had varying levels of cognitive and physical impairment, as assessed by the Minimum Data Set (MDS), and all required significant assistance with bathing and other activities of daily living. The facility's own policy emphasized the right of residents to self-determination and to make choices about their care, including bathing schedules. Despite this, the facility did not honor the residents' stated preferences for bathing frequency, as confirmed by the Director of Nursing during an interview. This failure to provide care in accordance with resident choice constitutes a deficiency in supporting resident rights and self-determination.
Failure to Notify Practitioner of New Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to notify the medical practitioner of new pressure ulcers for two residents. For one resident, staff identified a skin issue on the left heel and obtained a one-time order to wash and cover the wound, but when a Nurse Practitioner assessed the area the following day and identified it as a stage 3 pressure ulcer, no treatment orders were obtained, and the practitioner was not notified to request further treatment. The resident was cognitively intact and required varying levels of assistance with daily activities. For another resident, staff noted an open area on the left side of the back, but there were no treatment orders for this wound or for a wound on the sacrum, as confirmed by a review of the treatment administration record. The DON confirmed that the practitioner was not notified of the wound until the day of the survey. The facility's policy requires prompt notification of the practitioner and resident representative when a change in condition necessitates new or altered treatment, which was not followed in these cases.
Failure to Post Daily Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comply with its policy and federal requirements to post daily nurse staffing information at the beginning of each shift. This information should include the facility name, date, current resident census, and the total number and actual hours worked by Registered Nurses, Licensed Practical Nurses, and Certified Nurse Aides responsible for resident care. Observations on multiple dates revealed that the required nurse staffing information was not posted anywhere in the facility, which could potentially affect all 44 residents residing there. The Director of Nursing confirmed during an interview that the daily nurse staffing information had not been posted as required. The facility's policy, dated August 2023, mandates that this information be made readily available in a readable format to residents and visitors, updated to reflect any staff absences, and maintained for a minimum of 18 months. Despite these guidelines, the facility did not adhere to the policy, resulting in a deficiency noted by the surveyors.
Environmental Deficiencies in Resident Rooms
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment in several resident rooms, as observed during an inspection. Specific issues included scrapes on walls behind beds and in bathrooms, stained areas of the floor around toilet bases, and scrapes on closet doors in multiple rooms. Additionally, there were cracked bathroom sinks, closet doors pulled off tracks, cracks in linoleum, and missing or loose transition strips between bathrooms and rooms. Some rooms also had non-functioning lights above beds, loose toilet roll holders, and ventilation covers coated with a gray fuzzy substance. These deficiencies were confirmed during an environmental tour with the Regional Director of Operations and the Maintenance Director. The Maintenance Director acknowledged the need for cleaning and repairs but confirmed that there were no active work orders for the identified concerns. The facility's census at the time was 44, with 33 occupied resident rooms, and the issues were noted in 9 of these rooms.
Failure to Secure Medications and Treatments in Medication Carts
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to secure residents' medications and treatments in medication carts, as observed on multiple occasions. On 5/1/24 at 6:52 AM, a medication cart next to an office was found unlocked and unattended. Further observations revealed two additional unlocked and unattended carts down the 200 hall. At 7:13 AM, a Registered Nurse (RN) was seen entering a resident's room for a treatment, leaving the treatment cart unlocked in the hallway. Again, at 8:32 AM, the same RN was performing a treatment in another resident's room with the door open, leaving the treatment cart unlocked and out of view in the hallway. The RN confirmed that the cart should not be left unlocked and unattended, explaining that the cart was left unlocked when the RN went to let someone into the building without locking it first. An interview with the Administrator on 5/2/24 at 8:40 AM revealed that the facility has 15 self-ambulatory residents, 7 of whom have cognitive impairments. The Administrator confirmed that medication and treatment carts should be locked unless a nurse is actively preparing a treatment or medication. The facility's policy on medication storage mandates that all drugs and biologicals be stored in locked compartments under proper conditions, which was not adhered to in these instances.
Failure to Obtain Treatment Orders for Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility staff failed to obtain treatment orders for pressure ulcers for two residents. Resident 1 was readmitted to the facility with a pressure ulcer on the left lateral foot, but the facility did not evaluate the skin condition or obtain treatment orders. Observations revealed the presence of eschar on the left lateral foot, but no treatment orders were found in the medical records, progress notes, care plan, or medication administration records. Interviews with the RN and ADON confirmed the absence of treatment orders for the wound on Resident 1's left foot. Similarly, Resident 3 was admitted to the facility with a pressure wound on the left heel, but no treatment orders were documented. The wound was observed to be unstageable with moderate serosanguineous drainage. Interviews and record reviews confirmed that there were no orders for wound care for Resident 3's left heel. Both cases highlight the facility's failure to obtain necessary treatment orders for pressure ulcers, leading to deficiencies in care.
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 374 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 immediate-jeopardy cases — 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 Gretna
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newport House | 6.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 8 | 0 |
| The Lighthouse At Lakeside Village | 7.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| Brookestone Village | 7.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 10 | 0 |
| Brookestone Meadows Rehabilitation And Care Center | 8.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Good Samaritan Society - Millard | 8.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Adept Nursing & Rehab Of Gretna.
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.