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

East Lake Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

1900 Jeanwood Dr, Elkhart, IN 46514 · Non profit - Corporation · 152 certified beds · (574) 264-1133 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (574) 264-1133 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 13 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 middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • 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 (2/5)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
3900 E Bristol St · (574) 266-4546 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3900 E Bristol St · (574) 970-0004 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3900 E Bristol St · (574) 264-0113 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Walker Park, 3419 E Bristol St · 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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 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 fell from 5 to 4 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 rating4★
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 increased2.7%11.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.1%5.5%5.4%typical
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 symptoms6.0%25.2%6.5%typical
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 injury1.9%3.9%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened3.3%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.0%23.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.4%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.1%3.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control20.1%23.3%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table2.9%13.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.2%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine91.8%79.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.0%22.2%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.1%10.8%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.801.611.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.261.441.80better

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.

59.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 99 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

59.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
34.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.22U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 34.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 61 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 26% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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 SNF59.7%CMS range 50.0–67.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.3%CMS range 6.6–13.910.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge34.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge22.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge21.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 worsened6.0%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 hospitalization5.6%CMS range 3.1–10.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.941.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this 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

0.46
RN hours/ resident / day
0.93
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.38
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.76
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.33
RN hoursweekends
45.2%
Total nursing turnover
46.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 152 beds and averages 102.3 residents a day — about 67% occupied, or roughly 50 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.76 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.46 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.38 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 4.04 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.51 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-20)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2025-01-28)

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.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure blood pressure parameters were followed as ordered for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for blood pressure parameters. The facility also failed to ensure areas of bruising were assessed and monitored and heel boots were applied as ordered for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for skin conditions non-pressure related. (Residents 10, 6, 62, and 110)Findings include:1. The record for Resident 10 was reviewed on 4/15/26 at 3:52 p.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, hypertension and atherosclerotic heart disease. A Care Plan, dated 5/17/18 and reviewed on 4/1/26, indicated the resident was at risk for ineffective tissue perfusion related to the diagnoses of hyperlipidemia (elevated lipids), history of stroke, cardiomyopathy, coronary artery disease, and hypertension. Interventions included, but were not limited to, administer medications as ordered. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/31/26, indicated the resident was…

    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 · Ecited before2026-04-20 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was set at the correct flow rate and physician orders were obtained for the use of oxygen for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Residents 110, 109, and 74)Findings include:1. During random observations on 4/13/26 at 3:30 p.m., and 4/14/26 at 10:39 a.m. and 3:17 p.m., Resident 110 was observed wearing oxygen via nasal cannula. The oxygen was set at seven liters per minute and connected to the concentrator in the room. The record for Resident 110 was reviewed on 4/14/26 at 3:42 p.m. The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, cellulitis of the left lower limb, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low oxygen levels), heart disease, peripheral vascular disease, and heart failure. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 4/7/26, indicated the resident was cognitively intact for daily decision making, had no skin issues, and received oxygen…

    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 · Ecited before2026-04-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    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 infection control practices were in place and implemented related to staff failing to wear the correct personal protective equipment (PPE) for residents in enhanced barrier precautions and droplet isolation for 1 of 3 pressure ulcer treatments observed and 3 of 9 residents observed during medication administration. The facility also failed to ensure multi-use equipment was disinfected after each use for 3 of 3 residents who were observed having their vital signs checked. (Residents 43, 117, 74, 109, 108, 54, and 40)Findings include: 1.On 4/16/26 at 9:51 a.m., the Wound Nurse and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) entered Resident 43's room to complete a treatment to the resident's sacrum. The Wound Nurse washed her hands and the ADON sanitized her hands prior to donning gloves. Neither one of the nurses donned a gown at that time. The ADON repositioned the resident to his right side and the Wound Nurse pulled down the resident's pants and removed the dressing to the sacrum. After removing the…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-20 · 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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer treatments were completed as ordered by the physician for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. (Resident 109)Finding includes:During an interview on 4/13/26 at 11:00 a.m. Resident 109 indicated her pressure ulcer bandage does not get changed every day. During a random observation on 4/13/26 at 12:41 p.m., CNA 1 assisted the resident to the bathroom. At that time, the resident had a bandage observed to her sacrum with a date of 4/11/26. The CNA observed the bandage as well and indicated the date was 4/11/26. On 4/13/26 at 3:30 p.m., LPN 1 was asked to perform a skin assessment for the resident. At that time, the resident was assisted to her right side and the LPN removed her pants and brief. The bandage on the resident's sacrum was dated 4/11/26. During an interview at that time, LPN 1 indicated she had not changed the bandage and she believed the treatment was supposed to be done every day. During a wound treatment on 4/16/26 at 7:17 a.m., the Wound Nurse removed the resident's…

    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 · D2026-04-20 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure food and/or fluid intake was documented for residents with a history of weight loss for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for nutrition. (Residents 4, 6, and 74)Findings include: 1. The record for Resident 4 was reviewed on 4/16/26 at 3:07 p.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to Alzheimer's disease with early onset and end stage renal disease with dependence on renal dialysis. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/13/26, indicated the resident was cognitively impaired for daily decision making. He had sustained an unplanned weight loss and was receiving dialysis. A Nutrition At Risk (NAR) progress note, dated 4/9/26, indicated the resident had a significant weight loss of 10.9% within the last 90 days. A Care Plan, reviewed on 4/10/26, indicated the resident was at risk for altered nutritional status due to Alzheimer's disease, type 2 diabetes, dementia, end stage renal disease, hyperlipidemia, depressive disorder, and anxiety. Interventions included, but were not limited to, monitor food and…

    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 · Dcited before2025-01-28 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) for a dependent resident timely related to nail care and shaving for 1 of 3 reviewed for ADLs. (Resident 35) Finding includes: During an observation and interview, on 1/23/2025 at 10:21 A.M., Resident 35 had a full beard and his nails were jagged with a brown substance under them. Resident 35 indicated he received bed baths twice a week and did not have any problems with them but preferred to have assistance with shaving and nail care. Resident 35 indicated staff had only offered to assist him with shaving once or twice a month. During an observation and interview on 1/24/2025 at 9:11 A.M., Resident 35 had a full beard and jagged nails with a brown substance under them. He indicated that no one had offered to assist him with shaving or nail care. During an observation and interview on 1/27/2025 at 9:27 A.M., Resident 35 indicated the night shift CNA had shaved him and he was happy that his goatee…

    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 · Dcited before2025-01-28 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the plan of care for a resident who required two staff present for care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident 34) Finding includes: During an observation on 1/27/2025 at 9:27 A.M., CNA 8 exited Resident 35's room by herself. During an interview on 1/27/2025 at 9:29 A.M., Resident 35 indicated the CNA that had just left the room had helped him with toileting. He indicated he usually only had one caregiver in the room providing assistance because that was usually all they had working on the floor. He indicated it was rare that two staff members assisted him with care in his room, but occasionally two staff providing transfer assistance with the mechanical lift. During an observation on 1/28/2025 at 9:13 A.M., CNA 2 answered Resident 35's call light and asked the resident what he needed. The resident informed the CNA that he needed to use the urinal and CNA 2 proceeded into the resident's room and closed the room…

    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 · Dcited before2025-01-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to infection control measures were followed during medication administration observation for 1 of 8 residents observed receiving medications (Resident 17) and a linen cart was covered for 1 of 5 halls. (Hall 500) Findings include: 1. During an observation of a medication pass for Resident 17 on 1/24/2025 at 10:22 A.M., QMA 7 dropped a calcium tablet onto the medication cart. She picked up the tablet with her bare hand and placed it into a medication cup with Resident 17's other medications. During an interview with QMA 7 during the medication pass, she indicated she should not have administered the medications to the resident and should have destroyed all of the resident's medications once she had put the calcium table into the medication cup with the other medications. During an interview on 1/24/2025 at 10:26 A.M., QMA 17 indicated she was unsure of the facility policy for destruction of contaminated medications. During an interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing, who was present at the time, she indicated she was…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-01-29 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    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 and interview, the facility failed to date multi-dose medication containers when opened, for 2 of 3 medication carts observed. (100 hall & 600 hall) Findings include: 1. During an observation of a 100 hall medication cart with LPN 6, on 1/24/2024 at 9:58 A.M., the following multi-dose medication containers lacked a date that indicated when it was opened: 1 bottle of atropine eye drops, and 1 bottle of Mylanta. 2. During an observation of a 600 hall medication cart with LPN 5, on 1/24/2024 at 10:17 A.M., the following multi-dose medication containers lacked a date that indicated when it was opened: 3 bottles of polyethylene glycol, 1 bottle of simethicone, 1 bottle of icosapent ethyl, and 1 bottle of potassium. A policy, titled, Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications, Biologicals, and dated 7/21/2022, was provided by the Director of Nursing on 1/26/2024 at 9:15 A.M. as current. The policy indicated, .Facility staff should record the date opened on the primary medication container (vial, bottle, inhaler) when the medication has a shortened expiration date…

    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 · D2024-01-29 · 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 record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a person-centered care plan was developed for 1 of 26 residents whose care plans were reviewed. (Resident 12) Finding includes: A record review was completed on 1/25/2024 at 1:14 P.M. Resident 12's diagnoses included, but were not limited to: acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, Atrial Fibrillation, Congestive Heart Failure, and chronic Pleural Effusion (build up of fluid between lungs and chest). A Physicians' Order, dated 1/15/2024, indicated Resident 12 had a PleurX Drain (an indwelling suction tube used to remove excess fluid or air) to drain fluid and record output every day. A hospital Discharge Note, dated 12/12/2023, indicated the resident still required a PleurX catheter for daily drainage upon admission to the facility for chronic right pleural effusion. Resident 12's current care plans lacked a specific care plan for the use and care the PleurX drain, including potential respiratory complications and interventions. A Care Plan, dated 12/20/2023, indicated the resident was at…

    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 · Dcited before2024-01-29 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received showers or complete bed baths as scheduled for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. (Residents 12 and 22) Findings include: 1. During an interview, on 1/22/2024 at 1:37 P.M., Resident 12 indicated he had received only one shower since admitting to the facility on [DATE]. An admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 12/19/2023, indicated the resident was dependent on staff for bathing and showering needs. A Significant Change MDS, dated [DATE], indicated it was very important to choose between tub bath, shower or bed baths. A review of the facility January 2024 shower binder, on 1/25/2024 at 3:00 P.M., indicated Resident 12 had the following shower sheets documented in the binder: 1/5/24 - shower 1/7/24 - shower 1/8/24 - complete bed bath 1/19/24 - shower During an interview, on 1/25/2024 at 3:54 P.M., Unit Manager 11 indicated the resident should have had more documented showers or…

    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 · Dcited before2024-01-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Oxygen usage signage was posted outside resident rooms and failed to ensure residents had current Physician Orders for the use of oxygen for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Residents 12 and 136) Findings include: 1. During an observation, on 1/23/2024 at 2:38 P.M., Resident 12 was observed receiving oxygen. There was no oxygen signage posted in or outside of room. During an observation, on 1/24/2024 at 9:30 A.M., Resident 12 was observed receiving oxygen. There was no oxygen signage posted in or outside of room. During an observation, on 1/25/2024 at 9:13 A.M., Resident 12 was observed receiving oxygen. There was no oxygen signage posted in or outside of room. During an interview, on 1/25/2024 at 9:55 A.M., LPN 3 and LPN 12 both indicated there should have been oxygen signage posted outside of Resident 12's door indicating oxygen use. During an observation, on 1/26/2024 at 2:35 P.M., Resident 12 was observed…

    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 · Dcited before2024-01-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility staff failed to perform proper hand hygiene when preparing medications for administration to residents, for 2 random infection control observations during medication administration. Findings include: 1. During an observation of medication pass, on 1/23/2024 at 11:41 A.M., LPN 3 approached the medication cart and failed to perform hand hygiene before setting up medications for a resident. Alcohol based hand rub (ABHR) was available on the medication cart. During an interview on 1/23/2024 at 11:42 A.M., LPN 3 indicated she should have used the ABHR to clean her hands before setting up medications. 2. During an observation of medication pass, on 1/24/2024 at 8:45 A.M., LPN 4 made notes and documented medication for one resident, and failed to perform hand hygiene before setting up medications for another resident. ABHR was available on the medication cart. During an interview on 1/24/2024 at 8:47 A.M., LPN 4 indicated she should have washed her hands before preparing medications for the next resident. On 1/26/2024 at 9:15 A.M., the DON…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

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 3 of 53.9-0.9 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.4-0.4 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.7-0.7 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 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 ColumbusColumbus, 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
DRUMMER, CARLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2017
FEHRIBACH, GREGORYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 12/14/2004
HANIFY, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2022
LAZARD, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/29/2021
MANTRAVADI, GEETAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/21/2021
MUKES-GAITHER, BEVERLYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2022
PAYNE, MONICAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/09/2021
BABCOCK, PAULIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/30/2020
CAINE, VIRGINIAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/10/1994
HARRIS, LISAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/22/2003
AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2007
BEHM, ELLENIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/27/2022
DICE, MARKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023
HARRIS, MCKENZIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/29/2026
SIDDIQUI, KAMRANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/31/2026
VAN CAMP, STEVENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner 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.

$10.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-10.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.1M
Related-party expense10% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 72%Medicare 7%Other / private 21%

About 72% 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 $1.1M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$358per resident / day
operating cost
$10,882per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$324per 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 155269. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-20, 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