LouisianaChurch Point

Acadia St. Landry Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

830 S. Broadway St., Church Point, LA 70525 · Acadia County · 134 certified beds · avg 127 residents/day · certified since Nov 27, 2002

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
4
Serious findings on record
$268,528
Fines, last 3 years
3.58
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 12, 2025 · F-0600

The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Feb 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 9, 2024 · F-0656 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.

Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jan 2, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 9, 2024 · F-0658 · triggered by a complaint

The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.

Why it matters: Care that falls below professional standards can directly harm a resident's health and recovery.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jan 2, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 9, 2024 · F-0687 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults.

Why it matters: Neglected feet can develop painful sores and infections, especially dangerous for residents with diabetes.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jan 2, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (46)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 9, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint
Mar 11, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts.
Mar 11, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
Mar 11, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide at least one adequately sized room for dining and activities, with good lighting, airflow, and furniture.
Mar 11, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Mar 11, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Mar 11, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Mar 11, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Mar 11, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason.
Mar 11, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Feb 12, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Feb 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately.
Feb 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Feb 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Feb 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
Feb 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Feb 12, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away.
Feb 12, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
Feb 12, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Feb 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered.
Feb 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have.
Feb 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Feb 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
Dec 9, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint
Dec 9, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint
Dec 9, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · from a complaint
Dec 9, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint
May 29, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · from a complaint
May 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint
Jan 11, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require.
Jan 11, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Jan 11, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician.
Jan 11, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts.
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure resident assessments were done by a qualified health professional. Assessments guide all of a resident's care, so the person doing them must be properly trained.
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time.
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies.
Nov 7, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint
Nov 7, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Aug 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint
Aug 29, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint
Aug 29, 2023C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · from a complaint

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (13 → 9).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202350E
2024183G ▲
2025131G ▲
2026100E

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

2 fines totaling $268,528.

DateTypeAmount / length
Feb 12, 2025Fine$164,824
Dec 9, 2024Fine$103,704

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityLouisiana avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.584.043.95bottom 28% in Louisiana; bottom 41% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.130.320.69bottom 9% in Louisiana; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.943.453.50bottom 25% in Louisiana; bottom 28% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.060.200.48bottom 1% in Louisiana; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)0.047.645.8
RN turnover (%)0.041.642.9

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.29, RN 0.12, weekend 2.71. Staffing rating: 1/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
1926 LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest30%07/15/2022
All Therapy Management LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest30%07/15/2022
Care Point LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest15%07/15/2022
Castille, MichaelIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest8%07/15/2022
Coon, StevenIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest8%07/15/2022
Henry, JohnIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%07/15/2022
Hensgens, BrianIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest15%07/15/2022
Hensgens, CraigIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest15%07/15/2022
Jcom LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest10%07/15/2022
Lebleu, DaltonIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest15%07/15/2022
Lemoine, ShannonIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest8%07/15/2022
Vanhook, StephenIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest8%07/15/2022
1926 LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2022
All Therapy Management LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2022
Care Point LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2022
Castille, MichaelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2022
Coon, StevenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2022
Henry, JohnIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2022
Hensgens, BrianIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2022
Hensgens, CraigIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2022

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Senior Village Nursing & Rehabilitation Center9.4 miOpelousas, LA★★★☆☆3/5
Evangeline Oaks Guest House11.8 miCarencro, LA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Eunice Manor11.9 miEunice, LA★★★☆☆4/5
Heritage Manor of Opelousas12.2 miOpelousas, LA★☆☆☆☆2/5
The Ellington12.2 miRayne, LA★★☆☆☆3/5
The Encore Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center12.7 miCrowley, LA★★★★☆4/5
Our Lady of Prompt Succor Nursing Facility12.8 miOpelousas, LA★★★★☆4/5
Landmark of Rayne13.6 miRayne, LA★★★☆☆3/5
Courtyard Manor Nurse Care Center & Assisted Liv13.7 miLafayette, LA★★★★☆4/5
Oak Lane Wellness & Rehabilitative Center14.8 miEunice, LA★★☆☆☆2/5
Southwind Nursing & Rehabilitation Center14.9 miCrowley, LA★★★☆☆3/5
Lady of the Oaks Retirement Manor15.0 miLafayette, LA★★☆☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Church Point →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 195564.