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: PRIORITY MANAGEMENT (38 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 25, 2026
6
Serious findings on record
most recent Sep 3, 2025
$186,253
Fines, last 3 years
2.97
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Dec 4, 2024 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Nov 26, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Dec 4, 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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Nov 26, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Aug 1, 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 (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Aug 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Aug 1, 2024 · F-0835 · triggered by a complaint
The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
Why it matters: Poor administration often shows up as understaffing, supply shortages, and care problems across the whole facility.
Severity (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Aug 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Aug 1, 2024 · F-0726 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Why it matters: Undertrained caregivers are more likely to miss warning signs and make care mistakes.
Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Aug 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 3, 2025 · 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: Oct 15, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 22 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. F-0656
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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. F-0759
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. F-0578
View all 22 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
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
Feb 25, 2026
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · F-0656
Feb 25, 2026
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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. · F-0759
Feb 25, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Feb 25, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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. · F-0657
Feb 25, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Feb 25, 2026
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
Sep 3, 2025
▲ 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
Sep 3, 2025
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. · from a complaint · F-0600
Dec 17, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
Dec 17, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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. · F-0695
Dec 17, 2024
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
Dec 17, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851
Dec 4, 2024
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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. · from a complaint · F-0600
Dec 4, 2024
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 1, 2024
▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespread
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 1, 2024
▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespread
The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint · F-0835
Aug 1, 2024
▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726
Apr 24, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · from a complaint · F-0585
Jan 31, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Jan 31, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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. · F-0640
Jan 31, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677
Jan 31, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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. · F-0686
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 6).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations:
14
Serious citations (G–L):
5
2025
All citations:
2
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2026
All citations:
6
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2024
14
5
L ▲
2025
2
1
G ▲
2026
6
0
E
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.
3 fines totaling $186,253, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
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
Sep 3, 2025
Fine
$12,425
Sep 3, 2025
Payment Denial
13 days from Oct 16, 2025
Dec 4, 2024
Fine
$52,855
Aug 1, 2024
Fine
$120,973
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityLouisiana averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
2.97
Louisiana average:
4.04
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.19
Louisiana average:
0.32
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
2.61
Louisiana average:
3.45
U.S. average:
3.50
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)
2.97
4.04
3.95
bottom 7% in Louisiana; bottom 13% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.19
0.32
0.69
bottom 22% in Louisiana; bottom 2% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
2.61
3.45
3.50
bottom 10% in Louisiana; bottom 13% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.16
0.20
0.48
top 39% in Louisiana; bottom 7% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
69.3
47.6
45.8
bottom 6% in Louisiana; bottom 6% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
—
41.6
42.9
—
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 3.40, RN 0.22, weekend 2.99.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.40 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Pilgrim Manor Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
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.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
All 13 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Priority Management — 38 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.
CMS records place this facility in Bossier, LA — 9 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 195594.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
The Care File
Visit checklist — Pilgrim Manor Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation
1524 Doctors Drive, Bossier City, LA 71111 · (318) 742-1623
Health inspection rating 1/5 · CMS overall 1/5 · ▲ FEDERAL ABUSE CITATION FLAG· Fines (3y): $186,253
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Dec 4, 2024 (F-0600, Immediate jeopardy, 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.
▲ Dec 4, 2024 (F-0689, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Aug 1, 2024 (F-0689, Immediate jeopardy, widespread): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
☐ "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
☐ "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
☐ "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
☐ "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
☐ "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
☐ "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Louisiana midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
☐ "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
☐ "CMS reports 69% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "The ownership record on file lists 13 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 195594 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)