Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
A standard survey is most likely before around December 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Southwind Nursing & Rehabilitation Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident receiving Dabigatran Etexilate Mesylate was not monitored for bruising and/or bleeding as required by the facility's policy. Despite the policy mandating daily assessments for side effects, there was no documentation of such monitoring in the resident's MAR. Interviews with an LPN and the DON confirmed the oversight, highlighting a deficiency in the resident's care.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment was verbally and physically abused by another resident with severe cognitive impairment in the dining room. The incident involved arguing, pushing with a wheelchair, and slapping, as witnessed by visitors and confirmed by facility staff. No injuries were reported, but the facility failed to adhere to its abuse and neglect policy.
A facility failed to report an abuse incident within the required timeframe. An altercation between two residents, one severely and one moderately cognitively impaired, resulted in physical abuse. Despite being documented by staff, the incident was not reported to the state agency as required by facility policy.
The facility failed to submit Level II PASARR evaluations for two residents with new mental illness diagnoses. One resident was diagnosed with Unspecified Psychosis Disorder, and another with Bipolar Disorder, but neither was referred for the necessary evaluation. The Social Service Director confirmed the oversight.
The facility failed to provide food in a form that met the needs of residents on pureed diets. Observations showed that the cook did not follow the correct recipe for pureeing rice, resulting in a product with whole grains. Additionally, pureed turnip greens contained visible bacon bits and stems. A dietary staff member placed regular textured beans and sausage on a resident's pureed meal, despite the resident being on a pureed diet. The Dietary Manager confirmed these inconsistencies.
A resident with multiple health issues and moderately impaired cognition was unable to reach their call bell, which was placed behind them under an incontinent pad. The facility's policy requires call lights to be within reach, but this was not adhered to, as confirmed by an LPN during an observation.
A facility failed to secure a resident's toilet, compromising safety. The resident, who was cognitively intact and required assistance for toilet transfers, reported using the bathroom without help. The maintenance supervisor was unaware of the issue, despite monthly checks and maintenance being performed when notified. The administrator confirmed that daily QA checks should include room inspections, but a QA check was not conducted on the day the issue was first observed.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment repeatedly pulled her call bell station off the wall, making it unreachable. Despite staff awareness, the issue was not addressed in her care plan until surveyors identified the deficiency.
The facility failed to properly store medications, as loose pills were found in the bottom of medication cart drawers. During an inspection, an LPN confirmed the presence of two yellow oblong pills and one and a half white oblong pills loose in Cart #4. The DON also confirmed the loose pills and stated they should not have been there.
The facility did not provide the correct portion sizes for pureed meals, affecting two residents. During a lunch observation, pureed food items were served with a 1/2 cup scoop instead of the required 3/4 cup or 6 oz spoodle. The Dietary Manager confirmed the error, noting that staff should have followed the recipe spreadsheets for appropriate serving sizes. The cook reported being instructed to use a half cup scoop for all pureed items, indicating a miscommunication or misunderstanding of the facility's policy.
The facility failed to obtain hospice recertification for three residents receiving hospice care. A resident with Senile Degeneration of Brain, another with end-stage Parkinson's, and a third with Cardiovascular Disease did not have current recertification statements in their EHR. The DON confirmed the absence of these documents, which were not maintained in any other form. This deficiency was identified through a review of the EHR and an interview with the DON.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses experienced nausea and refused medications for two days. The facility failed to notify the resident's physician and representative, contrary to policy. The oversight was confirmed through interviews with staff and the resident's representative.
Failure to Monitor Anticoagulant Side Effects
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper monitoring of a resident who was prescribed an anticoagulant medication, Dabigatran Etexilate Mesylate. The resident, who had been admitted with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation and heart failure, was not monitored for signs of bruising and/or bleeding from the start of the medication on February 13, 2025, through February 18, 2025. The facility's policy required daily or as-needed assessments for such side effects, but there was no documentation of this monitoring in the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) or comprehensive plan of care. Interviews with facility staff, including an LPN and the Director of Nursing, confirmed the lack of monitoring and documentation for the resident receiving the anticoagulant. Both staff members acknowledged that the resident should have been monitored for bruising and/or bleeding, and the findings should have been documented in the MAR. The absence of this monitoring and documentation represents a failure to adhere to the facility's policy on anticoagulant therapy, resulting in a deficiency in the resident's care.
Failure to Protect Resident from Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from verbal and physical abuse, as evidenced by an incident involving two residents. Resident #R1, who was moderately cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 8, was subjected to verbal and physical abuse by Resident #3, who was severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 6. The incident occurred in the dining room, where Resident #3 approached Resident #R1, began arguing, and physically assaulted her by pushing her with a wheelchair and slapping her in the face. This altercation was witnessed by family members of another resident and was documented in the facility's incident reports. The incident was confirmed through interviews with visitors and facility staff, including the Administrator and Director of Nursing. The visitors reported that Resident #3 initiated the confrontation by telling Resident #R1 to move and subsequently threatened and hit her when she refused. Despite the physical altercation, no injuries were reported for either resident. The facility's policy on abuse and neglect, which emphasizes the residents' right to be free from abuse, was not adhered to in this situation, resulting in a deficiency in ensuring a safe environment for Resident #R1.
Failure to Timely Report Abuse Incident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of physical and verbal abuse to the state survey agency within the required two-hour timeframe. This deficiency involved an incident between two residents, where one resident, who was severely cognitively impaired, engaged in an argument with another resident, who was moderately cognitively impaired. The incident escalated to physical abuse when the severely impaired resident hit the moderately impaired resident in the face. Despite the altercation being witnessed and documented by staff, the facility did not report the incident to the state survey agency as mandated by their policy. The facility's policy on abuse and neglect clearly outlines the requirement for immediate reporting of abuse allegations to the state agency. However, in this case, the facility's administrator and director of nursing confirmed that the incident was not reported. The failure to report the incident in a timely manner represents a breach of the facility's policy and state guidelines, which are designed to protect residents from abuse and ensure prompt investigation and intervention.
Failure to Submit Level II PASARR Evaluations for Residents with New Mental Illness Diagnoses
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents with qualifying mental disorders were referred for a Level II PASARR evaluation and determination. Specifically, two residents, identified as Resident #6 and Resident #76, were not referred to the appropriate state-designated authority for evaluation despite having new diagnoses that qualified them for such a review. Resident #6 was admitted with diagnoses including Depression and Unspecified Psychosis, and on a later date, was diagnosed with Unspecified Psychosis Disorder. However, there was no evidence that a Level II PASARR evaluation was submitted for this resident. Similarly, Resident #76 was admitted with diagnoses including Depression and Wernicke's Encephalopathy and was later diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder. Again, there was no evidence of a Level II PASARR evaluation being submitted. The Social Service Director, identified as S13SSD, confirmed during interviews that she was responsible for submitting these reviews and acknowledged that she failed to do so for both residents, despite being aware of their new qualifying mental illness diagnoses.
Failure to Provide Properly Pureed Diets
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that food was prepared and served in a form that met the individual needs of residents on pureed diets. Specifically, the facility did not puree food items to the appropriate consistency for residents requiring pureed diets. Observations revealed that the cook, S10Cook, did not follow the correct recipe for pureeing rice, using parboiled rice instead of the required instant rice mix, resulting in a product with whole grains and a sticky texture. Additionally, the pureed turnip greens contained visible bacon bits and stems, indicating they were not pureed to the appropriate consistency. The Dietary Manager, S8DM, confirmed these inconsistencies and acknowledged that the correct recipe was not used. Furthermore, the facility failed to ensure that regular textured food items were not placed on a resident's meal tray who was on a pureed diet. During the preparation of a resident's lunch meal tray, dietary staff member S11Dietary placed regular textured beans and sausage on top of the resident's pureed beans and sausage, despite the resident being on a pureed diet. S11Dietary stated that this was done because the resident wanted extra juice/gravy from the regular textured beans. The Dietary Manager confirmed that this was inappropriate for a resident on a pureed diet.
Failure to Ensure Call Bell Accessibility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide reasonable accommodations for a resident's needs by not ensuring the call bell was within reach. The resident, who was admitted with multiple diagnoses including dysphagia, shortness of breath, protein-calorie malnutrition, major depressive disorder, anxiety, dependency on dialysis, cervical disc disorder, lumbar vertebra fracture, encephalopathy, and pain, had a BIMS score indicating moderately impaired cognition. The resident required extensive assistance with bed mobility and toileting, and total dependence with two-person assistance for transfers. During an interview and observation, the resident stated that the staff placed the call bell too far for him to reach. At the time of observation, the resident was sitting in a geri-chair, and the call bell was found laying across the bed behind him, under an incontinent pad, making it inaccessible. An LPN confirmed the call bell was not within reach for the resident, which was a failure to adhere to the facility's policy that requires call lights to be placed within reach of residents.
Facility Fails to Secure Resident's Toilet, Compromising Safety
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that all areas and equipment were in good repair, specifically failing to secure a resident's toilet to the floor. This deficiency was identified during an investigation involving eight residents, with the issue being observed in the bathroom of a resident who was cognitively intact and required supervision or assistance for toilet transfers. The resident's toilet was found to be loose and easily moved with a gentle nudge, and the resident reported using the bathroom without assistance. The maintenance supervisor stated that room checks were conducted monthly and maintenance was performed when notified by residents or staff, but he was unaware of the loose toilet. The facility administrator confirmed that daily quality assurance checks were supposed to include room inspections, but a review of the QA document revealed that maintenance issues, including loose toilets, were noted, and a QA check was not conducted on the day the issue was first observed.
Failure to Implement Person-Centered Care Plan for Call Bell Issue
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered care plan for a resident who repeatedly pulled her call bell station off the wall. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment as indicated by a BIMS score of 8, was observed with her call bell bed station dislodged and hanging off the wall, making it unreachable from her bed. Despite the resident's ability to call for help, she was unable to reattach the call bell station herself, and the issue was not addressed in her care plan. Multiple staff members, including the Director of Nursing, Registered Nurse Supervisor, Administrator, and Maintenance personnel, were aware of the ongoing problem with the call bell station. The maintenance staff had previously replaced the call bell station, but the issue persisted. The Administrator acknowledged that the resident should have been care planned for this behavior, but it was not done until surveyors highlighted the deficiency.
Improper Storage of Medications in Cart #4
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly store drugs as evidenced by loose pills found in the bottom of the medication cart drawers. During an inspection of Cart #4, two yellow oblong pills were observed loose on the bottom of the second drawer on the left side, and one white oblong pill along with half of a white pill were found loose on the bottom of the second to last drawer on the right side. These pills were located underneath resident medication blister packages. The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) confirmed the presence of the loose pills and acknowledged that they should not have been there. The Director of Nursing (DON) also confirmed the loose pills in the drawers and stated that they should not have been present in the medication cart.
Failure to Provide Correct Portion Sizes for Pureed Meals
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to meet the nutritional needs of residents by not providing the correct portion sizes for pureed meals. During an observation of the food service line, it was noted that pureed food items, including rice, turnip greens, beans and sausage, and cornbread, were being served with a 1/2 cup scoop instead of the required 3/4 cup or 6 oz spoodle for the pureed beans and sausage. This discrepancy was confirmed by the Dietary Manager (S8DM), who acknowledged that the staff should have followed the recipes and recipe spreadsheets that list the appropriate serving sizes. The cook (S10Cook) stated she was instructed to use a half cup scoop for all pureed food items, indicating a miscommunication or misunderstanding of the facility's policy on portion sizes.
Failure to Obtain Hospice Recertification for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain the recertification of terminal illness for three residents who were receiving hospice care. Resident #1, diagnosed with Senile Degeneration of Brain, had her last recertification signed on 03/04/2024 for the period ending 05/01/2024. Resident #2, with a diagnosis of end-stage Parkinson's, had her initial certification period from 09/01/2023 to 11/29/2023, but no subsequent recertifications were documented. Resident #3, diagnosed with Cardiovascular Disease, had her last recertification signed on 02/16/2024 for the period ending 05/19/2024. These deficiencies were identified through a review of the facility's electronic health records (EHR) and confirmed by the Director of Nursing (S1DON). The S1DON acknowledged that she was responsible for ensuring all hospice documents were current and scanned into the EHR. However, during an interview, she confirmed that there were no current recertification statements for the three residents in question. The hospice documents were only maintained in the EHR and not in any other form, such as hospice binders. Despite checking her emails, the S1DON was unable to locate the necessary recertifications for the residents, indicating a lapse in maintaining up-to-date hospice documentation as required by the facility's agreement with the Contracted Hospice Agency.
Failure to Notify Physician and Resident Representative of Medication Refusal
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's physician and resident representative (RP) were immediately notified of a change in the resident's condition. Specifically, the resident experienced nausea and refused to take her medications over two days. Despite the facility's policy requiring medication refusals to be reported to the prescriber, the resident's physician and RP were not informed of the situation. This oversight was identified for one of the three sampled residents in the report. The resident in question had severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including constipation, nausea with vomiting, dementia, overactive bladder, muscle weakness, protein-calorie malnutrition, and atrial flutter. The resident's medication administration record showed that several medications and supplements were not given on two consecutive days due to the resident's refusal. Progress notes indicated that the resident continued to experience nausea during this period, but there was no documentation that the physician or RP were notified of the medication refusals. Interviews with the resident's RP, an LPN, the nurse practitioner, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the physician and RP were not informed of the resident's condition and medication refusals. The RP only became aware of the situation when visiting the resident and subsequently requested that the resident be sent to the emergency room for evaluation. The resident was hospitalized for four days before returning to the facility. Both the Director of Nursing and the regional nurse acknowledged that the RP and NP should have been notified of the resident's change in condition.
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 80 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Crowley
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Landmark Of Rayne | 1.6 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| The Ellington | 5.7 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| The Encore Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center | 6 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Acadia St Landry Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 15 mi | — | 9 | 0 |
| Kaplan Healthcare Center | 15.3 mi | — | 14 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Southwind Nursing & Rehabilitation Center.
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 August 2026) and official state health department websites.