Citations in Louisiana
Statistics, citations and compliance trends for long-term care facilities in Louisiana.
Statistics for Louisiana (Last 12 Months)
Financial Impact (Last 12 Months)
Latest citations in Louisiana
A facility failed to maintain a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment when multiple hallways had scattered dry spots and scuff marks, a resident's room floor and fall mat had large dry tan substances, and the resident's mattress was discolored, foul-smelling, compressed, and had small bugs flying around it. Staff and leadership confirmed the conditions were not clean or sanitary, and the resident had cerebral palsy with severe cognitive impairment.
Failure to provide ordered wound care for three residents with wounds and pressure ulcers. One resident with a stage 3 ulcer and skin breakdown, one resident with a stage 2 pressure ulcer, and one resident with a skin tear abrasion all had MAR blanks showing missed treatments. LPNs confirmed the care was not completed, citing lack of wound care education, discomfort performing the treatments, uncertainty about responsibility, and high acuity on the hall. DONs confirmed that blank MAR entries meant the care was not done.
LPNs Assigned Wound Care Without Competency Assessment: Several LPNs were assigned wound care duties for residents even though the facility had not assessed their competencies or provided wound care training. The LPNs stated they had limited or no wound care education or certifications, and some said they did not feel comfortable performing wound care. Leadership confirmed wound care responsibilities had been shifted to floor nurses and that no competency evaluations or training had been provided.
A resident with a documented Amoxicillin allergy was given Amoxicillin-Pot Clavulanate via PEG by LPNs without first checking allergies or clarifying the order with the provider. The MAR showed multiple doses were administered, and nursing notes documented an itching reaction before the medication was discontinued and changed to Keflex.
Failure to complete annual CNA performance evaluation. The facility did not ensure that a CNA had a performance review at least once every 12 months. Review of the personnel file showed the CNA had a hire date in 2016 and no annual evaluation since the last one on file, and HR confirmed the evaluation was overdue and should have been done annually.
Delayed Incontinence Care: A resident who was cognitively intact and totally dependent for toileting was left in a soiled brief for hours despite pressing the call light and telling staff she needed to be changed. An LPN reported the resident’s increased bladder urgency was communicated to the assigned CNA, but the CNA forgot to return because she was busy with other residents; the resident was later found with a soiled brief and saturated bed sheets. The IDON stated CNAs were expected to round every 2 hours for incontinence care.
Unclean Hallways, Resident Room Floor, and Unsanitary Mattress
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment by leaving multiple hallway floors on Hall 1 through Hall 6 with dry brown, black, yellow, and tan spots and scuff marks scattered throughout. These conditions were observed during facility tours on 06/29/2026 and 06/30/2026. During an interview and observation, S11HKS confirmed the hallway floors were not clean and should have been, and S1ADM also confirmed the floors were not clean and that spots should not have been on the floors. S1ADM stated she expected staff to mop and clean the hallway floors routinely at least once a day and respond to spots as needed. The facility also failed to maintain Resident #3's room floor in a clean and comfortable condition. Resident #3 was admitted with cerebral palsy and had a quarterly MDS showing a BIMS of 00, indicating severe cognitive impairment. In Room A, a large dry tan substance was observed on the floor between the right side of the bed and the fall mat, under the IV pole, and another large dry tan substance was observed on the fall mat. These same substances were still present on a later observation. S11HKS confirmed the substances should have been cleaned in a timely manner but were not, and S1ADM confirmed the dry tan substance on the floor and fall mat should have been cleaned up. The facility further failed to maintain Resident #3's mattress in a sanitary manner and in good condition. The mattress was observed without linen and had a large faded light-blue circular discoloration in the center with scattered yellow, light-green, and brown spots, additional brown spots across the surface, a strong foul odor, and 11 small bugs flying around the discolored areas. The middle of the mattress was compressed and curved inward in a shallow bowl-like shape. S12CNA confirmed the mattress was faded, had green spots, and had small bugs flying above it, and stated he had removed the linen earlier that morning but did not report the mattress condition. S4ADON, S1ADM, S5IPSDC, S14MD, and S15MA all confirmed the mattress was not sanitary, clean, or homelike and that it should have been replaced.
Failure to Provide Ordered Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide ordered wound care for three residents with existing skin wounds and pressure ulcers. Resident #1 had diagnoses including peripheral vascular disease, atopic dermatitis, and inflammatory disorders of the scrotum, and had physician orders for wound care to the left groin and back/skin tears, including cleansing the wound site, applying silver alginate, and covering with an absorbent pad or Mepilex. Resident #1’s June 2026 MAR showed no documented wound care on 06/26/2026, and the assigned LPN confirmed the care was not performed because she had not received education on wound care management and did not feel comfortable completing it. Resident #2 had diagnoses including hemiplegia/hemiparesis affecting the right dominant side and type II diabetes mellitus, with an order for daily wound care to the right buttock for a stage 2 pressure ulcer. Resident #2’s June 2026 MAR showed no documented wound care on 06/04/2026, 06/11/2026, 06/16/2026, and 06/25/2026. One LPN stated she was unaware the wound care was to be performed by the floor nurse, and another LPN stated she did not perform the care because she had not been provided education on wound care management. The second LPN also stated she did not feel comfortable performing the treatment. Resident #3 had diagnoses including cellulitis, xerosis cutis, and rash with other nonspecific skin eruption, and had an order for wound care to the left posterior thigh for a skin tear abrasion, including cleansing, applying silver collagen and gentian violet, and covering with a silicone foam border. Resident #3’s June 2026 MAR also showed no documented wound care on 06/04/2026, 06/11/2026, 06/16/2026, and 06/25/2026. The assigned LPNs confirmed the missed treatments, with one stating she was unable to complete the daily wound care due to high acuity on her hall and reported it on the 24-hour report sheet. The DONs reviewed the MARs and stated that a blank on the MAR meant the task was not completed and that if it was not documented or signed off, it was considered not done.
LPNs Assigned Wound Care Without Competency Assessment
Penalty
Summary
Nursing staff were assigned to provide wound care to residents without having their competencies assessed or receiving wound care training. During interviews, S10LPN stated he was providing wound care to assigned residents, but the facility had not assessed his competencies or provided training before assigning him wound care responsibilities. S8LPN stated she was a recent graduate with limited clinical experience, had no certifications or educational background in wound care management, did not feel comfortable providing wound care without proper education and training, and had not been assessed or trained before being assigned wound care duties. S7LPN and S9LPN also stated they were providing wound care to assigned residents despite having no certifications or educational background in wound care management, and both said the facility had not assessed their competencies or provided training before assigning them wound care tasks. S9LPN stated she did not feel comfortable providing wound care because of her lack of education and training in wound management procedures and protocols. S5IPSDC confirmed wound care responsibilities had recently been assigned to floor nurses after the wound care nurse position was eliminated, and S2IDON confirmed nursing staff were not provided education or training in wound care management and that the facility had no competency assessments or evaluations for S7LPN, S8LPN, S9LPN, and S10LPN to provide wound care.
Medication Given Despite Documented Allergy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident was free from significant medication errors by administering an antibiotic in a manner that was not consistent with accepted professional nursing standards. Resident #1 was admitted with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting the right dominant side, and her allergies included Amoxicillin. Despite this documented allergy, the physician orders as of 06/29/2026 showed Amoxicillin-Pot Clavulanate 875-125 mg via PEG tube every 12 hours for a dental infection, and the MAR showed doses were administered on 06/28/2026 at 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., and on 06/29/2026 at 8:00 a.m. Nursing notes documented that the resident was started on Amoxicillin 875-125 for a tooth abscess and then noted to have an itching allergy reaction to the medication, after which the NP was notified and the medication was discontinued with a new order for Keflex. Interviews confirmed that the LPNs who administered the medication did not review the resident’s allergies before giving the doses and did not call the doctor before the first administration. The DON confirmed that nursing staff were expected to review allergies and EHR allergy alerts before administering medications and to notify the ordering provider when an allergy to an ordered medication was identified.
Failure to Complete Annual CNA Performance Evaluation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a performance review was completed at least once every 12 months for 1 of 2 CNA personnel files reviewed. Review of the CNA's personnel file showed a hire date of 09/16/2016 and did not reveal an annual performance evaluation completed since 09/01/2024. During an interview on 06/30/2026 at 4:10 p.m., HR confirmed the CNA had not had an annual performance evaluation since 09/01/2024 and stated that the evaluation should have been completed annually.
Delayed Incontinence Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident received ADL care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the resident’s comprehensive person-centered care plan. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including generalized muscle weakness, lack of coordination, and difficulty walking, and her MDS showed a BIMS of 14, indicating she was cognitively intact. Her care plan identified her as totally dependent for toileting. During interview, the resident stated she notified a CNA that she needed her soiled brief changed and had to remain in the soiled brief for 4 hours before staff changed her. An LPN reported that the resident’s ADL care needs and increased bladder urgency were communicated to the assigned CNA, and on return to work the resident was found with a soiled brief and saturated bed sheets. The CNA stated the resident pressed the call light and asked to be changed, but the CNA forgot to return because she became busy with other residents and call lights, and the resident was not changed for more than 2 hours. The IDON stated CNAs were expected to round every 2 hours for incontinence care and confirmed it was not acceptable for a resident to wait more than 2 hours to be changed.
Find your facility
Search by name to see its inspection history, citations and penalties — and how to prepare for the next survey.
Get alerted when Immediate Jeopardy citations hit in Louisiana — free
You're all set
Compliance trends in Louisiana
Data through Mar 2026Comparisons below measure the most recent period Apr 2025 – Mar 2026 against the prior period Apr 2024 – Mar 2025 (two equal 12-month windows). The most recent 4 months are excluded because CMS is still publishing them.
Top tags by month · last 24 months
dashed = still reportingMonthly citation counts for the 5 most-cited tags. The dashed tail is the 4-month reporting lag.
Frequency movers
Biggest change in how often each tag is cited, as a rate per 100 inspections (so it isn't skewed by survey volume): Apr 2025 – Mar 2026 vs the prior period Apr 2024 – Mar 2025. Only tags with at least 20 citations in both periods are shown.
Severity movers
Tags whose average scope/severity shifted the most: Apr 2025 – Mar 2026 vs the prior period Apr 2024 – Mar 2025. The number is the average severity on the A–L scale (A=0…L=11); the letter is the band it falls in. A rise means the same tag is being cited at a more serious level — note the average can move enough to rank here while staying within the same letter. Same 20-citation minimum applies.
Care domain movers
Citations grouped into CFR care domains — F-tags by their §483 regulatory section (CMS State Operations Manual, Appendix PP) — measured as a rate per 100 inspections: Apr 2025 – Mar 2026 vs the prior period Apr 2024 – Mar 2025. Share is the domain's portion of citations this period; avg severity is the mean scope/severity letter and immediate jeopardy the percentage cited at J–L, both over the current period. Domains with at least 20 citations in both periods are shown; the sparkline tracks the last 12 months (left = oldest).
Immediate jeopardies · this period
Citations at the most serious scope/severity — J–L, immediate jeopardy, residents placed at risk of serious harm or death — over Apr 2025 – Mar 2026 vs the prior period Apr 2024 – Mar 2025. "Surveys with an IJ" counts distinct health inspections that had at least one.
Survey activity · by month
faded/dashed = still reportingCitations each month split into complaint-driven (unscheduled, triggered by grievances) vs standard surveys — bars, left axis — with the number of inspections as a line on the right axis. Rising inspections signal more scrutiny; a rising complaint share means more off-cycle surveys. The most recent 4 months are still being reported.
Deficiency-free survey rate
Share of health surveys that found zero deficiencies — the odds of a clean survey. Apr 2025 – Mar 2026 vs the prior period Apr 2024 – Mar 2025; the most recent 4 months are still being reported (dashed).
Penalties · by month
faded = still reportingTotal civil money penalty dollars imposed on the state's facilities each month — how hard the state is enforcing. The most recent 4 months are still being reported, and penalties often lag citations by several months.
Emerging tags
Tags that weren't established last period but surged — an early warning, distinct from movers (which track already-common tags). Criteria: fewer than 20 citations in the prior period, but at least 10 this period and 2.5× their prior volume. The sparkline shows monthly counts over the last 12 months (left = oldest).
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 26, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
In your survey window? See what surveyors are citing.
The Survey-Prep Report maps your facility's risk from 12 months of CMS and state citation data — what's being cited around you and what to check first. $129 one-time.
