No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Hickory Creek At Columbus

5480 E 25th Street, Columbus, IN 47203 · Government - County · 36 certified beds · (812) 372-6136 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (812) 372-6136 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 8 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • about 19% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
TestRx MD0.5 mi
2753 Fox Pointe Dr · (812) 296-6499 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
735 Whitfield Dr · (812) 372-4220 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Aldi1.2 mi
1505 N National Road
Park
National Rd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased1.5%11.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.9%5.5%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.4%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms13.1%25.2%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.2%3.9%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened2.8%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication38.5%23.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.4%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.5%3.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.5%23.3%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.8%13.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.1%79.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission10.9%22.2%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit3.4%10.8%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.531.611.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.481.441.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

0.31U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.11hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.15hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 51% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified82.6%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened8.7%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.72
RN hours/ resident / day
0.66
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.97
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.35
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.72
RN hoursweekends
38.7%
Total nursing turnover
42.9%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 36 beds and averages 28.3 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.35 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.72 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.97 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.05 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.46 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.71 to 0.72 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-12)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-29)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure care planned interventions were implemented for 2 of 12 residents reviewed for Care Plans. (Residents 19 and 7)Findings include:1. Resident 19's room was observed on 09/10/2025 at 1:35 P.M. The resident's call light was observed near her bed. The call light was white, and there was no bright colored tape attached to the call light.The resident was observed on 09/11/2025 at 9:07 A.M. The resident was in her room in bed. The resident's call light was within reach. There was no brightly colored tape attached to the call light. The resident's clinical record was reviewed on 09/10/2025 at 2:27 P.M. An Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/02/2025, indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction affecting the right dominant side, hypertension, and seizure disorder. The resident used a wheelchair and was dependent on staff for mobility. The resident experienced one fall…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-12 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide physician prescribed medications in a timely manner for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for medications. (Residents 6 and 29) Findings include:1.The clinical record for Resident 6 was reviewed on 09/11/2025 at 10:24 A.M. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/16/2025, indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, anxiety, and depression. The Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR) indicated the resident was to receive the medication Paxlovid 100/150 milligrams (mg), twice a day, once from 7:00 A.M. to 11:00 A.M., and once from 5:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M., for a diagnosis of COVID-19, with a start date of 08/31/2025, and a discontinued date of 09/04/2025. The record indicated the medication was not administered due to being unavailable on the following dates and times: -08/31/2025 at 7:00 A.M. to 11:00 A.M., -08/31/2025 at 5:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M., -09/01/2025 at 7:00 A.M. to 11:00 A.M.,…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure foods were stored in a sanitary manner related to unlabeled foods for 1 of 3 kitchen observations.Findings include:During the initial tour of the facility kitchen with [NAME] 5 on 09/08/2025 at 7:46 A.M., the following items were observed in the refrigerator:-A tray that contained two cups of ambrosia salad, a small bowl of potato salad, and a ham sandwich in plastic bag. The items nor the tray were labeled with a prepared on or use by date,-A tray that contained four small cups of a fruit crumble dessert, a small cup of cucumber tomato salad, and a small cup of tapioca pudding. The items nor the tray were labeled with a prepared on or use by date, -A large, unlabeled pitcher that was less than half full of an orange drink, and -A large, unlabeled pitcher that was less than half full of a pink drink.During an interview, on 09/08/2025 at 7:48 A.M., [NAME] 5 indicated the items on trays were from the weekend and should have been labeled with prepared on date. The drink pitchers should have been labeled with a prepared…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the physician of blood glucose levels per the physician's order for 1 of 14 residents reviewed for notification of change. (Resident 8) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 8 was reviewed on 08/28/24 at 2:25 P.M. A Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 08/21/24, indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, heart failure, hypertension, diabetes, anxiety, and depression. A current physician's order, with a start date of 03/20/24, indicated the resident was to be administered insulin lispro per a sliding scale. The physician was to be notified if the resident's blood glucose level was greater than 350. The June, July, and August 2024, EMAR/ETAR (Electronic Medication Administration Record/Electronic Treatment Administration Record) indicated the resident's blood glucose levels were greater than 350 on the following dates and times: - On 06/10/24 at 11:00 A.M., the resident's blood glucose level was 368, - On 06/20/24…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to monitor a resident's blood pressure as ordered by the physician's for 1 of 14 residents reviewed for quality of care. (Resident 7) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 7 was reviewed on 08/27/24. A Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 08/05/24, indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, hypertension, diabetes, depression, and insomnia. A current physician's order, with a start date of 06/13/24, indicated the staff were to obtain the resident's blood pressure daily and to notify the physician's office if the systolic (top number) was less than 100. The blood pressure record was to be taken to the next appointment on 12/13/24. The June, July, and August 2024, EMAR/ETAR (Electronic Medication Administration Record/Electronic Treatment Administration Record) lacked any documented blood pressures. The Vitals Report for June, July, and August 2024, lacked documented blood pressures for Resident 7 on the following dates:…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-16 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's record accurately reflected the administration of a narcotic medication for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for resident records. (Resident B) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 01/12/24 at 2:17 p.m. An admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 12/02/23, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, prostate cancer and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. The November 2023 EMAR (electronic medication administration record) indicated the resident could receive oxycodone/acetaminophen (a narcotic pain medication) 5 mg (milligrams), 325 mg every four hours PRN (as needed) for pain. During an interview on 01/12/23 at 2:13 P.M., Resident B indicated on Sunday 11/26/23 RN 2 asked him after lunch to take his PRN pain medication. He told her he was not having any pain and didn't need the medication. She told him if he didn't take it she would have to throw it away. The Controlled Substance Record indicated the resident…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to identify pressure ulcers in a timely manner and document treatment administrations for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. (Resident 1) Findings include: During an interview on 06/07/23 at 9:31 A.M., Resident 1 indicated she had pressure wounds on her bottom that had recently healed. The resident's record was reviewed on 06/11/23 at 4:51 P.M. A Significant Change MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 05/19/23, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, diabetes, heart failure, renal disease, and hypertension. The resident required extensive staff assistance with transferring, toileting, and personal hygiene. The resident was at risk for pressure ulcers, and currently had one Unstageable pressure ulcer (obscured full-thickness skin and tissue loss in which the extent of tissue damage within the ulcer cannot be confirmed because the wound bed is obscured by slough [moist, non-viable tissue] or eschar [dead tissue]). A Wound Management Detail Report, dated…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store medications appropriately related to insulin pens for 1 of 2 medication carts reviewed. (Back Hall medication cart) Findings include: On 06/12/23 at 10:55 A.M., the Back Hall medication cart was observed with RN 2, and contained the following: - A Lispro insulin pen for Resident 5, with an open date of 05/14/23. The nurse verified the open date. The pen was 1/4 full. The resident had received the insulin that morning. - A Lispro insulin pen for Resident 7, with an open date of 05/14/23. The nurse verified the open date. The pen was 1/4 full. The resident had received the insulin that morning. During an interview on 5/14/23 at 10:58 A.M., RN 2 indicated the Lispro insulin pens were good for 30 days after the open date. During an interview on 06/12/23 at 2:00 P.M., the Administrator indicated the facility did not have a specific medication storage policy, they followed the pharmacy recommendations. The current facility pharmacy manual, with a revised date of 01/01/22, was provided by the DON on 06/12/23…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES — 90 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 53.9+0.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.4+0.6 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.3-1.3 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.7+0.3 vs chain
The other 89 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Valparaiso Care & RehabilitationValparaiso, IN 2 of 5Arbor Grove VillageGreensburg, IN 2 of 5Bethany VillageIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Columbia Healthcare CenterEvansville, IN 2 of 5Community Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Eagle Valley MeadowsIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Harcourt Terrace Nursing And RehabilitationIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Harrison TerraceIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Hickory Creek At New CastleNew Castle, IN 2 of 5Maple Park VillageWestfield, IN 2 of 5Park Terrace VillageEvansville, IN 2 of 5Riverside VillageElkhart, IN 2 of 5Trailpoint VillageSouth Bend, IN 2 of 5University Nursing CenterUpland, IN 2 of 5Williamsport Nursing And RehabilitationWilliamsport, IN 3 of 5Allisonville MeadowsFishers, IN 3 of 5American VillageIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Brownsburg MeadowsBrownsburg, IN 3 of 5Countryside MeadowsAvon, IN 3 of 5East Lake Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterElkhart, IN 3 of 5Hickory Creek At CrawfordsvilleCrawfordsville, IN 3 of 5Hillcrest VillageJeffersonville, IN 3 of 5North Capitol Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Rosebud VillageRichmond, IN 3 of 5Rosewalk VillageIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Rosewalk Village At LafayetteLafayette, IN 3 of 5Spring Mill MeadowsIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Stonebrooke Rehabilitation CenterNew Castle, IN 4 of 5Autumn Ridge Rehabilitation CentreWabash, IN 4 of 5Beech Grove MeadowsBeech Grove, IN 4 of 5Clark Rehabilitation And Skilled Nursing CenterClarksville, IN 4 of 5Clinton GardensClinton, IN 4 of 5Creekside VillageMishawaka, IN 4 of 5Edgewater WoodsAnderson, IN 4 of 5Forest Creek VillageIndianapolis, IN 4 of 5Franklin MeadowsFranklin, IN 4 of 5Heritage House Rehabilitation & Health Care CenterConnersville, IN 4 of 5Hickory Creek At MadisonMadison, IN 4 of 5Hickory Creek At PeruPeru, IN 4 of 5Hickory Creek At RochesterRochester, IN

Showing 40 of 89; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
HENRY COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITALOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 05/07/2025
CHIES, STEVENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/01/2021
DYNES, SHELDONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2013
JACKSON, BLAKEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/01/2021
JACKSON, ETHANIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/01/2021
JACKSON, MARKIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/01/2021
JACKSON, MICHAELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/14/2024
JACKSON, WESSLEYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/01/2021
JUSTICE, DAVIDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/01/2021
KELSEY, DONNAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/18/2024
PIDGEON, JOHNIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2013
SHORE, MARIONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2013
STITLE, STEPHENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/01/2021
WARE, DEBORAHIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 08/27/2021
WRIGHT, THERESSAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/21/2021
RING, BRIANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2022
AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2021
BOWLING, KIMBERLYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/20/2026
DICE, MARKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023
MORIO-HALE, SABRINAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/08/2025
MUSTAKLEM, MARWANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/19/2025
SHANE, ANDREWIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2023
VAN CAMP, STEVENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 35 rows in the source record cover these 23 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$3.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+11.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$661K
Related-party expense19% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 83%Medicare 5%Other / private 12%

About 83% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $661K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$311per resident / day
operating cost
$9,446per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$350per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in IN

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Indiana Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Indiana
$8,943/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,326/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,639/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 155424. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-12, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next