Hamilton Trace Of Fishers

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

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.

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.

64.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 445 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 47.8% 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 159 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 0.72 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 92% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 108 beds and averages 102.6 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 5 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 3.74 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.69 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 3.20 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.96 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.39 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% 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

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.

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.

25 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-10 · 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 follow their policies and procedures for infection control, related to hand hygiene during dressing changes for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for infection control. (Resident D) Findings include: During an observation of wound care for Resident D, on 2-10-26 at 10:55 a.m., RN 3 and the Wound Care Nurse explained the procedure they were going to provide to the resident. The resident was to have the staff follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP- infection control measures for nursing homes, requiring staff to wear gowns and gloves during high-contact care for residents with chronic wounds to prevent germ spread, even when standard contact) for wound care. The RN and Wound Care Nurse removed the resident's wound dressing from the resident's right lower extremity (RLE). Gloves were removed and discarded with new gloves applied without hand hygiene or handwashing being observed. After the treatment to the resident's RLE wound area, both nurses assisted in cleaning up the area. Gloves were removed and discarded 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 · D2026-01-30 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a urinary catheter was provided with catheter care, monitoring, and documenting of urine outputs for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for catheters. (Resident B) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 1/30/24 at 2:00 p.m. The diagnoses for Resident B included, but were not limited to, central cord syndrome (spinal cord injury causing weakness without being paralyzed.) and neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (loss of bladder control). A physician's order, dated 12/20/25, indicated the staff were to bladder scan Resident B for urine retention every shift. If the resident's urine totals in the bladder were greater than 200 milliliters the medical provider was to be contacted. A physician's order, dated 12/29/25, indicated the staff was to remove Resident B's urinary catheter. The January 2026 Medication/Treatment Record (MAR/TAR) indicated on 12/20/25 in the evening shift, the resident's urine residual in his bladder was 855 milliliters. A physician's note, dated 12/20/25,…

  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 · F2025-05-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the use of beard restraints by dietary staff, separate storage of a personal lunch bag, ensure coverage of stored frozen food and ready-to-eat dessert, and distribution of food under sanitary conditions. This had the potential to affect 96 of 96 residents in the facility. Findings include: A kitchen tour was conducted, on 5/5/25 at 9:30 a.m., with the [NAME] Supervisor (CS). Dietary Aide (DA) 9 was observed in the kitchen without the use of a beard restraint to cover his facial hair and instead was wearing a surgical mask below his chin. An observation of the walk-in freezer was made during the tour. Four bowls of uncovered chocolate ice cream were observed on a tray. A personal lunch bag was observed sitting on a rack within the freezer. An observation of the main dining room was conducted on 5/5/25 at 12:24 p.m. Plates of dessert cakes were observed uncovered sitting on a cart, partially stacked on top of one another. During an interview with the CS on 5/5/25 at 11:59 a.m., she indicated she was told…

  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 · E2025-05-12 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to promote a dignified environment with not providing care and services timely and ensure a resident was dressed in street clothes while dining in the facility dining room for 14 of 18 residents reviewed for resident council, 3 of 7 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living, 1 of 4 residents reviewed for staffing and 2 of 2 residents randomly observed. (Resident D, Resident E, Resident F, Resident G, Resident H, Resident J, Resident K, Resident L, Resident M, Resident N, Resident O, Resident P, Resident Q, Resident R, Resident S, Resident T, Resident X, Resident V, Resident W, Resident Z, Resident DD, Resident EE and Resident C) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident V was reviewed on 5/12/25 at 11:12 a.m. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/21/25, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. On 5/7/25 at 9:53 a.m., Resident V's call light was observed to be on for approximately five minutes. Certified Nurse…

  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 · E2025-05-12 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  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 food was served at a palatable temperature for 14 of 14 residents reviewed for food. (Residents D, F, G, H, J, N, O, Q, R, T, X, 84, Z, and DD) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident DD was reviewed on 5/6/25 at 11:00 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, cellulitis. During an interview with Resident DD on 5/6/25 at 11:03 a.m., she indicated the food was delivered cold. 2. The clinical record for Resident 84 was reviewed on 5/5/25 at 11:15 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, hypertension. An interview was conducted with Resident 84 on 5/5/25 at 11:37 a.m. She indicated the food was often served cold. 3. The February 2025, March 2025, and April 2025 resident council minutes were provided by the Executive Director (ED) on 5/6/25 at 1:24 p.m. The attendees in the meetings included, but were not limited to: Resident R, Resident Z, Resident X, Resident F, Resident N, Resident H, Resident T, Resident Q, Resident D, Resident J, Resident G, and Resident O. 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 · D2025-05-12 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
  Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medical record was kept private and confidential by giving a resident the wrong medical record in error at discharge for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for discharge. (Resident B and Resident E) Findings include: A. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 5/7/25 at 9:35 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, stroke. The resident was discharged from the facility on 10/10/24. B. The clinical record for Resident E was reviewed on 5/12/25 at 12:27 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, pain. The resident was discharged from the facility on 10/10/24. During a Confidential Interview, Resident B was given Resident E's medical record at the time of discharge. It was not recognized until 24 hours after discharge from the facility. Resident B had gone to the emergency room with the medical chart that had been given to her by the facility at discharge. At that time, the hospital staff recognized Resident B had been given the wrong resident's medical chart and notified 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-12 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
  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 and record review, the facility failed to timely initiate and address a grievance for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for choices (Resident DD). Findings include: The clinical record for Resident DD was reviewed on 5/6/25 at 10:41 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, cellulitis (infection) of the right lower limb. She was admitted on [DATE]. A care plan, last reviewed 5/1/25, indicated Resident DD had acute pain related to cellulitis to the right lower extremity and a wound to the right heel. She also had complaints about back pain. She was able to report pain and efficacy of interventions. The goal was for her to have pain levels maintained at a consistent level of comfort while retaining as much function as possible. The interventions were to observe for side effects of treatment interventions, observe for efficacy of interventions, apply non-pharmacological intervention, treatment, and/or removal of the root cause of pain until the issue was resolved, and to monitor vital signs…

  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 · D2025-05-12 · tag F0645 — isolated
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure a timely Level I and Level II screening was obtained for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR). (Resident 16) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 16 was reviewed on [DATE] at 2:13 p.m. The resident was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, dementia, bipolar disorder (a mood disorder characterized by episodes of mania and depression), and depression. A facility Social Services admission Screening, dated [DATE], indicated the resident did have diagnoses which may impact adjustment, such as dementia or bipolar disorder. The Executive Director provided a Level I PASRR screen on [DATE] at 1:36 p.m. It indicated the facility completed the screening on [DATE]. The screening also indicated Reason for screening: This nursing facility resident has never had a PASRR Level I screen. The Social Services Director (SSD) was interviewed on [DATE] at 4:28 p.m. She indicated…

  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 · D2025-05-12 · tag F0661 — isolated
  Ensure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received a discharge summary at the time of discharge for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for discharge. (Resident B) Findings include: A. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 5/7/25 at 9:35 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, stroke. The resident was discharged from the facility on 10/10/24. During a Confidential Interview, Resident B was given Resident E's medical record at the time of discharge. She did not receive any of Resident B's medical or discharge information. An interview was conducted with the Executive Director (ED) and the Director of Nursing (DON) on 5/7/25 at 2:22 p.m. The ED indicated Resident B had received Resident E's medical record at the time of discharge by error. Both residents were discharged on the same day, 10/10/24. The medical records were placed in folders sitting on top of the nurse's station. The nurse gave Resident E's medical chart to Resident B by error. A discharge planning policy was provided by the ED on 5/7/25 at 1:36 p.m. It indicated…

  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 before2025-05-12 · 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 trim a resident's nails and assist a resident with transferring timely for 2 of 7 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care. (Resident 200 and Resident 253) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident 200 was reviewed on 5/5/25 at 3:18 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, cellulitis (infection) of the left lower limb and depression. She was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. An admission Minimum Data Set assessment, completed 5/7/25, indicated she was cognitively intact. During an interview on 5/5/25 at 3:18 p.m., Resident 200 indicated her nails were long and needed to be trimmed. Resident 200's nails were observed to extend well past the tips of her fingers and have worn green polish on them. On 5/7/25 at 9:54 a.m., the Executive Director provided the shower sheets for Resident 200, which indicated she had a bed bath on 5/6/25. The shower sheet did not indicate if Resident 200's fingernails…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CARDON & ASSOCIATES — 19 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 67 rows in the source record cover these 42 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.

21 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.

This home reported $6.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 31% 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

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