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

Scenic Hills At The Monastery

710 Sunrise Drive, Ferdinand, IN 47532 · For profit - Corporation · 88 certified beds · (812) 504-2048 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (812) 504-2048 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 14 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)

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 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
115 Main St · (812) 367-1906 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
20 Industrial Park Rd · (812) 367-2030 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1815 Main St · (812) 367-1771 · Call to confirm hours
Park
E 5TH St · (812) 367-1780 · 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 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 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 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 increased13.3%11.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.1%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 infection0.3%1.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.7%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 injury3.6%3.9%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.6%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication23.6%23.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.6%95.4%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.4%3.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control18.7%23.3%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.2%13.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.0%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.3%79.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission16.4%22.2%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit17.8%10.8%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.661.611.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.131.441.80worse

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.

56.1% 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 90 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

56.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
76.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.38U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.20hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 76.0% 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 75 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 0.38 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 66% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 SNF56.1%CMS range 47.4–63.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.7%CMS range 5.5–15.710.7%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 discharge76.0%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 discharge54.7%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 discharge57.3%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 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 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 worsened3.6%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 hospitalization6.9%CMS range 3.2–13.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.321.02Oct 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

0.43
RN hours/ resident / day
0.70
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.78
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.91
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.24
RN hoursweekends
44.3%
Total nursing turnover
64.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 88 beds and averages 86.3 residents a day — about 98% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 2.91 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.43 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.78 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 2.75 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.98 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.50 to 0.24 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% 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 (2026-05-22)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2025-03-10)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-22 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Wound assessments were incomplete and treatment orders were not followed. (Resident 3)Findings include:On 5/20/26 at 8:17 A.M., Resident 3 was observed sitting in the common area by the nurse's station in her wheelchair wearing a specialized orthopedic shoe on her right foot. On 5/18/26 at 9:59 A.M., Resident 3's clinical record was reviewed. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, dementia without behaviors and pressure ulcer on right heel.The most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/11/26, indicated Resident 3's cognition was severely impaired, had 1 or more unhealed, unstageable pressure ulcer that was facility acquired, used a wheelchair, and substantial to maximum assist of staff (staff performs half the effort) for sit to stand transfers.Physician's Orders included, but were not limited to, the following:Dietary Supplement: LiquaCel, 30 milliliters (mL), for…

    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 · D2026-05-22 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with weight loss was provided ordered nutritional supplements and monitored for weight loss for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for weight loss. Phyisican orders were not followed and meals and supplements were documented as given and were not. (Resident 48)Finding includes:On 5/19/26 at 2:29 P.M., Resident 48's clinical record was reviewed. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, dementia without behaviors and malnutrition.The most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 4/30/26, indicated Resident 48's cognition was severely impaired, set up assistance from staff for eating, had weight loss and was not on a weight loss regimen. Physician's Orders included, but were not limited to, the following:Fortified Foods -Special Instructions: Offer double portions at breakfast. Magic cup with lunch and dinner. Sandwich at bedtime (HS), ordered 4/29/25Dietary Supplement: Sandwich HS & food of choice HS snack at Bedtime (7:00 P.M. - 11:30 P.M.), ordered 1/27/25Dietary Supplement:…

    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 · D2026-05-22 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the clinical record included accurate documentation for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for nutrition and 2 of 2 resident reviewed for pressure ulcers. Documentation showed resident was getting supplements but was not and meal/snack consumption was documented before the resident had them. Resident's wound documentation lacked complete wound assessments. (Resident 48, Resident 2, Resident 3)Findings include:1. On 5/19/26 at 2:29 P.M., Resident 48's clinical record was reviewed. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, dementia without behaviors.The most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 4/30/26, indicated Resident 48's cognition was severely impaired, set up assistance from staff for eating, had weight loss and was not on a weight loss regimen. Physician's Orders included, but were not limited to, the following:Fortified Foods -Special Instructions: Offer double portions at breakfast. Magic cup with lunch and dinner. Sandwich at bedtime (HS), ordered 4/29/25Dietary Supplement:…

    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 before2026-05-22 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide sanitary care for 1 of 2 observations of incontinence care and 2 of 2 observations of wound care. The nursing staff failed to lather hands with soap for 20-30 seconds during handwashing, change gloves after touching multiple items in the bathroom during incontinence care, staff left an incontinence pad on after a resident urinated in it, and hands were not sanitized and gloves were not changed between dirty and clean tasks. (Resident 37, Resident 2, Resident 3)Findings include: 1. On 5/18/26 at 1:56 P.M., wound care on Resident 3's right heel pressure ulcer performed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 5 was observed. Resident 3 was laying on her back with her right foot elevated and a towel under it. The nurse removed the dressing. She removed her gloves and washed her hands with a ten second lather. LPN 5 put gloves back on and cleaned the wound with gauze and wound cleanser, applied skin prep to sorrounding tissue, and took the wound measurements. LPN 5 removed her gloves and washed her hands with an…

    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 · D2025-03-10 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    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 maintain resident dignity, and to protect and promote the rights of the residents. A dependent resident waited several minutes to be assisted to eat during 2 of 2 meals observed. (Resident 42) Findings include: During a continuous observation on 3/4/25 from 11:30 A.M. through 12:00 P.M., the following was observed on the locked unit: 11:33 A.M. A lunch cart was brought to the unit. 11:41 A.M. A lunch plate was placed in front of Resident 42, who was sitting in a high back chair at the table. 11:54 A.M. Legacy Leader 3 was observed serving cake to several residents. 11:58 P.M. The two other residents at the table with Resident 42 finished their meals. 12:00 P.M. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) 5 sat with Resident 42 to begin assisting to eat the meal (19 minutes after it had been placed in front of the resident). On 3/5/25 at 12:24 P.M., Resident 42's clinical record was reviewed. Diagnoses included, but was not limited to, hemiplegia/hemiparesis following stroke. The most recent Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS)…

    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 · D2025-03-10 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    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 ensure services provided met professional standards of quality for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for skin conditions. A blister on a resident was not assessed when initially identified, the nurse was unaware of the correct timing of the treatment, and the area was not cleaned appropriately. (Resident 40) Findings include: On 3/5/25 at 1:04 P.M., Resident 40's clinical record was reviewed. Diagnosis included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's, malnutrition, and depression. The most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/28/25, indicated a severe cognitive impairment. Resident 40 required substantial to maximum assistance (helper does more than half the effort) with toileting, showers, med mobility, and transfers. Current physician orders included the following: Inner left thigh: fluid filled blister. cover with border gauze, change daily and monitor until healed, dated 2/23/25. Blister on left upper thigh: cleanse wound with wound cleanser or normal saline, apply skin prep to peri-wound,…

    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 · D2025-03-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    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 ensure adequate supervision and assistance devices were received to prevent accidents for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for falls. A resident's mattress was not moved with the resident during a room change resulting in a fall, and fall interventions were observed not in place. (Resident 40) Findings include: On 3/5/25 at 1:04 P.M., Resident 40's clinical record was reviewed. Diagnosis included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's, malnutrition, and depression. The most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/28/25, indicated a severe cognitive impairment, no behaviors, and no falls. Resident required substantial to maximum assistance (helper does more than half the effort) with toileting, showers, bed mobility, and transfers. Current physician orders included, but were not limited to: Dycem to wheelchair. Monitor placement every shift with foot pedals in place, dated 2/26/24. Pressure reducing parameter mattress with bed in lowest position, dated 8/21/23. A current falls care plan, last…

    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 before2025-03-10 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of diseases and infections for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for skin conditions, and the facility failed to properly prevent and/or contain COVID-19 for 2 random observation. Staff failed to use proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) when providing care of residents and entering a COVID-19 room, did not clean a wound or wash hands with appropriate infection control techniques, did not change gloves between tasks, and touched medication with bare hands prior to administering to a resident. (Resident 40, Resident 52, Resident 81) Findings include: 1. On 3/5/25 at 1:04 P.M., Resident 40's clinical record was reviewed. Diagnosis included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's, malnutrition, and depression. The most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/28/25, indicated a severe cognitive impairment. Resident 40 required substantial to maximum assistance (helper does more than half the effort) with…

    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 · E2024-03-13 · 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure appropriate labeling and storage of medications for 2 of 3 medication carts (500 Hall Cart and 300 Hall Cart) with 11 of 16 residents reviewed for Medication Storage. (Residents 9, 4, 77, 28, 20, 17, 46, 14, 43, 23, and 18) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 3/12/24 at 1:03 p.m. of the 500 Hall medication cart with RN 4, the following concerns were observed: a. Resident 9's had two Levemir FlexTouch insulin pens in the top drawer of the medication cart. The first pen was dated with an open date of 1/30/24, and had approximately 150 units left in it. The second pen had an open date of 2/7/24. The best use by date indicated to use within 42 days. In the same bag, was a bottle of flonase nasal spray. The pharmacy labeling had been partially ripped off and had no identifying information. The medication was not in the original packaging. It was lying on its side. There was no open date on the medication and it was approximately three-quarters of the way used. The record for Resident 9 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-03-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    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 food was served and stored under sanitary conditions during 3 of 3 kitchen observations. This deficiency had the potential to affect 81 current residents who received meals from the kitchen. Findings include: 1. During the initial tour of the kitchen with the Dietary Manager on 3/7/24 at 9:10 a.m., the following concerns were observed: - The fryer had a moderate amount of brown crumbs in the oil. The Dietary Manager indicated it was last used at yesterday's dinner. - In the dry storage room under the vinegar and soy sauce shelf, there was a brown dried spill with food particles in it which measured 3 inches in length and 8 inches in width. A white piece of paper was under the bean shelf in the corner. - There were 2 jelly packets, 1 pink and 1 yellow sweetener packets under the cereal shelf. - The egg storage drawers had multiple yellow spots on the bottoms. - The grill had a heavy coating of charred black debris on the grates; the ledge in front and back of the grates had a heavy build up of black debris. - 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-12-08 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    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 a clean, homelike environment in resident resident rooms and resident areas for 2 of 2 days during the survey. Resident rooms were not cleaned daily and resident areas contained dust, debris, and trash. (Resident B, Resident C, Resident D, Resident F) Finding includes: 1. During a review of facility grievances on 12/7/23 at 12:50 P.M., a Resident Concerns Log included a concern, dated 11/13/23, by Resident B's family member regarding the cleanliness of Resident B's room (room [ROOM NUMBER]). The concern included, .[Family] is concerned that room is not being cleaned daily as she continues to find food ground in the carpet and the bathroom floor is in need (of) deep cleaning . 2. During an observation on 12/7/23 at 9:45 A.M., Resident C's carpet in room (room [ROOM NUMBER]) had a noticeable stain next to the resident's bed. A balled up tissue was on the floor at the base of the bed. 3. During an observation on 12/7/23 at 3:05 P.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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-08 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide qualilty care and services timely following resident falls that resulted in fractures for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for falls with fractures. A resident was not sent out for further assessment and treatment following a fall with multiple fractures that occurred before lunch, until after 8:00 P.M. that evening, and a resident's X-ray results confirming fractures were not communicated to the physician prior to receiving an order to transfer the resident to the hospital until more than 6 hours after the X-ray results were made available to the facility. (Resident F, Resident G) Findings include: 1. During a review of facility reported incidents on 12/7/23 at 12:55 P.M., an incident, dated 9/8/23, included that Resident F had fallen on 9/7/23 at 10:26 A.M. The following morning, Resident F had facial grimacing with movement of right leg and complained of pain. X-ray results included a right femoral neck fracture. During record review on 12/8/23 at 9:16 A.M., Resident F's diagnoses included, but were not…

    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 · D2023-08-17 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with bathing for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). A resident did not receive bathing according to the plan of care or resident preferences. (Resident F) Finding includes: During a review of facility grievances on 8/16/23 at 10:30 A.M., Resident F had submitted a grievance on 6/28/23 that he had not received a shower. During record review on 8/16/23 at 1:00 P.M., Resident F's diagnoses included, but were not limited to chronic kidney disease, heart disease, obesity, chronic pain, muscle weakness, and need for assistance with personal care. Resident F's most recent Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 5/17/23, included that the resident was cognitively intact, required extensive assistance with transfers, and required total dependence with bathing. Resident F's care plan included, but was not limited to; resident requires staff assistance to complete ADL tasks completely and safely with a goal of; Resident will have ADL needs met safely by staff…

    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
  • No harm found · C2026-05-22 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    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 ensure waste was properly contained in dumpsters for 2 of 2 random observations. A full garbage bag was observed hanging out of the dumpster, debris was scattered throughout the grounds, and a worn recliner sat behind the dumpsters.Findings include:On 5/21/26 at 9:20 A.M., during a random observation, the dumpsters on the side of the building were observed with a full bag of trash on the ground next to the dumpsters and another full bag of trash hung out of a dumpster. Cardboard, multiple soiled gloves, empty clear cups, and other debris was scattered throughout the grass by the dumpsters, and a worn, brown recliner sat behind the dumpsters with foot rest opened.On 5/22/26 at 8:35 A.M., during a random observation, the dumpsters were observed to have a full bag of trash that hung out of a dumpster. Multiple soiled gloves, empty clear cups, and other debris was scattered throughout the grass by the dumpsters, and a worn, brown recliner sat behind the dumpsters with foot rest opened.Interview on 5/22/26 at 8:45…

    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

“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 TRILOGY HEALTH SERVICES — 123 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 54.2-1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.5+0.5 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 53.3-2.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.8-0.8 vs chain
The other 122 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, per CMS)
1 of 5Heritage TheFindlay, OH 1 of 5The Oaks Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterZanesville, OH 2 of 5Homewood Health CampusLebanon, IN 2 of 5Violet Springs Health CampusPickerington, OH 2 of 5Woodmont Health CampusBoonville, IN 3 of 5Cobblestone Crossings Health CampusTerre Haute, IN 3 of 5Creasy Springs Health CampusLafayette, IN 3 of 5Cumberland Pointe Health CampusWest Lafayette, IN 3 of 5Forest Park Health CampusRichmond, IN 3 of 5Franciscan Health Care CenterLouisville, KY 3 of 5Greenleaf Health CampusElkhart, IN 3 of 5River Terrace Health CampusMadison, IN 3 of 5Smiths Mill Health CampusNew Albany, OH 3 of 5Springhurst Health CampusGreenfield, IN 3 of 5Springs Of Richmond, TheRichmond, IN 3 of 5St Mary Healthcare CenterLafayette, IN 3 of 5Stonegate Health CampusLapeer, MI 3 of 5Sun Prairie Senior LivingSun Prairie, WI 3 of 5Taylor Springs Health CampusGahanna, OH 3 of 5The Willows at Fritz FarmLexington, KY 3 of 5The Willows at HamburgLexington, KY 3 of 5The Willows at HarrodsburgHarrodsburg, KY 3 of 5The Willows at SpringhurstLouisville, KY 3 of 5Villages At Oak Ridge, TheWashington, IN 3 of 5Waunakee Valley Senior LivingWaunakee, WI 3 of 5Wellbrooke Of CarmelCarmel, IN 4 of 5Arlington Place Health CampusIndianapolis, IN 4 of 5Ashford Place Health CampusShelbyville, IN 4 of 5Aspen Place Health CampusGreensburg, IN 4 of 5Avalon Springs Health CampusValparaiso, IN 4 of 5Bethany Pointe Health CampusAnderson, IN 4 of 5Blair Ridge Health CampusPeru, IN 4 of 5Bridgepointe Health CampusVincennes, IN 4 of 5Cedar Creek Health CampusLowell, IN 4 of 5Clearvista Lake Health CampusIndianapolis, IN 4 of 5Forest Springs Health CampusLouisville, KY 4 of 5Glen Oaks Health CampusNew Castle, IN 4 of 5Glen Ridge Health CampusLouisville, KY 4 of 5Meadows Of Delphos TheDelphos, OH 4 of 5Meadows Of Ottawa TheOttawa, OH

Showing 40 of 122; 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
GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITALOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL100%since 05/01/2015
CORBIN, KATHYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/01/2015
MCLIN, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/06/1992
SCHUCKMAN, MATTHEWIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/15/2021
THACKER, ADAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2013
TRILOGY HEALTHCARE OF FERDINAND, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/01/2015
LUSK, KEVINIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2015
SHERMAN, BAILEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2015
DAVIS, DAVIDIndividualLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 12/31/2019
BARNEY, LEIGHIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/03/2025
AMERICAN HEALTHCARE REIT HOLDINGS LPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2015
AMERICAN HEALTHCARE REIT INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2018
CONTINENTAL MERGER SUB LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2021
GAHC3 TRILOGY JV LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2015
GAHC4 TRILOGY JV LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2018
PARAGON OUTPATIENT REHABILITATION SERVICES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2015
SISTERS OF ST. BENEDICT OF FERDINAND IND., INC.OrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/31/2017
TRILOGY INVESTORS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2015
TRILOGY MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/23/2025
TRILOGY REAL ESTATE FERDINAND II, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 06/20/2025
TRILOGY REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2015
TRILOGY REIT HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2015

CMS files one row per role, so the 31 rows in the source record cover these 22 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

14 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.

$13.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+15.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.6M
Related-party expense14% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 45%Medicare 9%Other / private 45%

This home reported $1.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% 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

$281per resident / day
operating cost
$8,552per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$333per 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 155493. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-22, 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