711 W. Cornerview Road, Gonzales, LA 70737 (opens Google Maps) · Ascension County · (225) 644-6581· 102 certified beds · avg 99 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1997 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: CENTRAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY (21 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · how star ratings work →
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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 5, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Mar 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 16 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. F-0550
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint F-0584
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. F-0842
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Jun 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0644 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0880 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's bedrooms did not give residents visual privacy — such as curtains or dividers — when privacy is needed. · F-0914 |
| Mar 5, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Aug 17, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Aug 17, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0761 |
| Aug 17, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Aug 17, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0600 |
| Aug 17, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · F-0609 |
| Aug 17, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 2).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 2 | 0 | D |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
2 fines totaling $158,838.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 26, 2024 | Fine | $150,326 |
| Mar 5, 2024 | Fine | $8,512 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Louisiana avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.41 | 4.04 | 3.95 | top 27% in Louisiana; top 26% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.30 | 0.32 | 0.69 | top 40% in Louisiana; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.66 | 3.45 | 3.50 | top 30% in Louisiana; top 35% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.48 | bottom 20% in Louisiana; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 45.6 | 47.6 | 45.8 | top 46% in Louisiana; bottom 48% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 57.1 | 41.6 | 42.9 | bottom 30% in Louisiana; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — 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 3.68, RN 0.25, weekend 3.05.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.68 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Ascension Oaks Nursing & Rehab Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kisatchie Health, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 52% | 02/01/2008 |
| Maumalanga, Holly | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 6% | 03/31/2025 |
| Price, Teddy | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2008 |
| Prico, INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 48% | 02/01/2008 |
| Zimmerman, Freda | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 12% | 03/31/2025 |
| Bolwahnn, Sheila | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2008 |
| Cantrell, Jeffrey Lee | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2013 |
| Central Management Company, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2008 |
| Central Management Company, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2008 |
| Kisatchie Health, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2008 |
| Maumalanga, Holly | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/31/2025 |
| Price, Teddy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2025 |
| Price, Teddy | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/30/2025 |
| Price, Teddy | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2025 |
| Prico, INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2008 |
| Rogers, Dawn | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/1993 |
| Shelton, James | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/23/1990 |
| Zimmerman, Freda | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/31/2025 |
All 18 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Central Management Company — 21 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 20 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gonzales Healthcare Center | 0.0 mi | Gonzales, LA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Landmark South Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 8.1 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Old Jefferson Community Care Center | 10.1 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Chateau D'ville Rehab and Retirement | 10.3 mi | Donaldsonville, LA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Jefferson Manor Nursing and Rehab Ctr, LLC | 13.3 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Center Point Health Care and Rehab | 13.6 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| White Oak Post Acute Care | 13.8 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | —/5 | SFF | |
| Heritage Manor of Baton Rouge II | 14.0 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Ollie Steele Burden Manor | 14.0 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Landmark of Baton Rouge | 14.1 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Woodleigh of Baton Rouge | 14.9 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Pines Retirement Center of Baton Rouge | 15.0 mi | Baton Rouge, LA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 195401.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details