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

Ashton Creek Health And Rehabilitation Center

4111 Park Place Drive, Fort Wayne, IN 46845 · Non profit - Other · 139 certified beds · (260) 373-2111 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (260) 373-2111 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Nov 2023
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

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
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • nursing-staff turnover (57%) runs well above the national median (45%)
  • about 20% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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

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

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3909 New Vision Dr · (260) 425-6402 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
11104 Parkview Cir Dr Ste 030 · (260) 266-4545 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Aldi0.7 mi
10511 Dupont Oaks Blvd · (855) 955-2534 · Call to confirm hours
Park
10902 Parkview Plaza Dr · (260) 266-1800 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
3948 New Vision Dr

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 3 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 improved from 3 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 increased7.9%11.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.6%5.5%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.5%0.4%0.9%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.2%1.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms9.3%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 injury4.6%3.9%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened8.3%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication15.6%23.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.4%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers8.8%3.6%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.8%23.3%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table6.2%13.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.1%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine81.0%79.0%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.0%22.2%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.9%10.8%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.011.611.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.421.441.80better

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.

53.9% 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 239 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

53.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
65.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.68U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.27hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.28hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 65.6% 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 93 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 0.68 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 91% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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 SNF53.9%CMS range 46.8–59.351.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.0%CMS range 7.2–14.310.7%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 discharge65.6%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 discharge66.7%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 discharge54.8%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 identified97.7%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 discharge98.9%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 stay1.8%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 worsened3.5%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 hospitalization7.7%CMS range 4.7–10.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.001.02Oct 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

1.01
RN hours/ resident / day
0.64
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.21
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.86
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.88
RN hoursweekends
57.1%
Total nursing turnover
21.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 139 beds and averages 118.0 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 21 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.86 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.01 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.21 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 3.31 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.08 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.07 to 0.88 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 57% is well above 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

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-02)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-22)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-11 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    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 effective pain management for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pain (Resident O). Findings include: On 9/10/24 at 10:24 A.M., Resident O's record was reviewed. Diagnoses included fractures of the right arm and right hand, inflammatory arthritis, pain in right shoulder, and muscle weakness. Hospital notes indicated the resident had fallen at home and was later hospitalized due to intractable pain (severe pain that's difficult to manage/treat) prior to being admitted to the facility for rehabilitation. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 9/1/24, indicated she had no cognitive impairments or behaviors. She'd indicated she had pain, rated at an 8, on a 1-10 scale with 10 being the worst pain. She required maximal assistance with her activities of daily living (ADL) and was receiving physical and occupational therapy. Care plans, revised on 9/4/24, indicated the resident had pain due to inflammatory arthritis and fractures and was prescribed opioid medications to treat her pain. Goals were to…

    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 · F2024-07-22 · 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 hand hygiene was performed when necessary, in the meal preparation and service process. 110 of 110 residents residing in the facility consumed food prepared in the facility kitchen. Findings include: During an observation on 7/16/24 at 9:15 AM the Dietary Manager (DM) picked up a garbage can lid from the floor and placed it back on top of the garbage can. No hand hygiene was performed, and she continued the kitchen tour opening the ice machine door and the walk-in cooler door. During an observation on 7/16/24 at 10:31 AM [NAME] 25 was using a blender to prepare pureed chicken for the lunch meal. During the process, the lid became loose, splattering a small amount of pureed chicken onto [NAME] 25's hands. [NAME] 25 wiped her hands on her uniform and continued the puree process, then handled the clean container the pureed chicken was poured into and the clean utensils without performing hand hygiene. During an observation on 7/17/24 at 11:07 am in the 400-hall dining room, [NAME] 27 was placing plates of…

    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 · Dcited before2024-07-22 · 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 ensure assistance was provided with managing denture care and grooming of facial hair for 1 of 6 residents reviewed (Resident 40). Findings include: On 7/16/24 at 9:48 AM Resident 40 was observed to have 5 coarse dark hairs on their chin. The hairs were approximately one-half inch long. Resident 40 was observed to be missing their upper front teeth. Resident 40's record was reviewed on 7/17/24 at 9:50 AM. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's, Disease, anxiety, depression and a cerebral infarction (stroke). Resident 40's Annual MDS dated [DATE] indicated their BIMS score was 12 (moderate cognitive loss according to CMS (CMS.gov, 2024). The MDS indicated Resident 40 required supervision or touching assistance with oral care and personal hygiene. The MDS indicated Resident 40 did not have issues with their dental health. Resident 40's Care Plan dated 10/9/23 indicated the resident required assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) due to…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-22 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure meal intakes and weights were monitored for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident B and Resident 305). Findings include: 1. During an interview on 7/16/24 at 11:13 AM, Resident B's family member indicated he was concerned about Resident B's nutritional status and meal intakes. He indicated Resident B was not offered meal trays at the dinner meal on 6/15/24 and the breakfast and lunch meals on 6/29/24. He indicated Resident B had poor meal intakes and was not provided assistance at many additional meals including breakfast on 6/22/24, the dinner meal on 6/24/24, the dinner meal on 6/26/24, the dinner meal on 6/27/24, and the dinner meal on 6/28/24. He was concerned additional meals may not have been offered and his father may not have been offered the assistance he needed to eat. Resident B's record was reviewed on 7/16/24 at 1:48 PM. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease with late onset, need for assistance with personal care, 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 · D2023-11-17 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to report timely, a suspicious injury of unknown source for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident N). Findings include: An Indiana Report, dated 11/12/23 at 11:52 a.m., indicated Resident N had been found with discoloration around her left eye and both wrists. A head to toe assessment was completed and no other injuries were observed. The resident denied pain and when asked, indicated she hadn't known how the injuries occurred. On 11/16/23 at 9:33 A.M., Resident N was observed seated in her room in a wheelchair with an overbed table positioned in front of her. She had a puffy black bruise below her left eye and dark discoloration around her right earlobe. She hadn't responded when asked how the bruise to her face occurred or when questioned if she had fallen. On 11/16/23 at 9:35 A.M., Resident N's roommate, identified as interviewable, was interviewed. The roommate indicated the night the injuries occurred, she hadn't heard the resident yell, raised voices or a scuffle behind the privacy curtain. On 11/16/23 at 10:09 A.M.,…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-17 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to assess timely and follow physician orders for treatment of a pressure ulcer for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident O). Findings include: On 11/16/23 at 11:51 P.M., Resident O's record was reviewed. The resident admitted to the facility following hospitalization for sepsis from skin infection of his lower extremities' chronic wounds. Other diagnoses included, diabetes and heart disease. A hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE] at 10:49 a.m., indicated the resident had been hospitalized for sepsis due to cellulitis of the lower extremities. While at his previous living facility, the wounds on his legs had become more swollen and red with increased drainage. Since admission to the hospital, his legs had improved significantly. Notably, the resident had buttock wounds. The wound care team had been consulted and planned to treat the buttock wounds with melgisorb, mepilex border and he was to continue with wound care in the outpatient setting. admission…

    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 before2023-08-23 · 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 interview and record review the facility failed to ensure oral hygiene was completed for 1 of 3 dependent residents (Resident D). Findings include: In an interview on 8/23/23 at 10:07 AM, Resident D indicated she needed assistance with oral hygiene care, such as brushing her teeth. Resident D indicated she had not received assistance with brushing her teeth on 8/23/23. Resident D indicated she preferred to brush her teeth in the morning and afternoon. In an interview on 8/23/23 at 11:16 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) 2 indicated residents received oral hygiene care daily, usually in the morning or based on their preference. CNA 2 indicated Resident D needed assistance with oral hygiene care. CNA 2 indicated she had not assisted Resident D with oral hygiene care on 8/23/23. In an interview on 8/23/23 at 11:27 AM, Qualifed Medication Aide (QMA) 3 indicated oral hygiene care was performed during AM care and PM care or based on resident's preferences. QMA 3 indicated AM care should be completed by 11 AM. QMA 3 indicated Resdient D needed assistance with oral hygiene care. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-07-11 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — pattern
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    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 privacy for 4 of 32 residents reviewed. (Resident 13, Resident 38, Resident 48, and Resident 97) Findings include: 1.During an interview with Resident 97 and her husband on 7/6/23 at 10:24 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) 20 opened the door to Resident 97's room without knocking and offered her medicine. During the medication administration, Case Manager 21 opened the door without knocking and indicated she needed to speak to Nurse 20 when she finished her task. Resident 97's husband indicated it was not unusual for employees to come in the room without knocking. On 7/6/23 at 10:37 AM RN 20 opened the door and reentered Resident 97's room without knocking. Resident 97's record was reviewed on 7/10/23 at 3:09 PM. Diagnoses included traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage with loss of consciousness for unspecified duration, cognitive communication deficit, and encephalopathy. A review of Resident 97's current quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-11 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received a shower/bed bath as scheduled for 1 of 23 residents reviewed. (Resident 61). Findings include: In an interview on 7/6/23 at 2:52 PM, Resident 61 indicated she had been receiving showers at the facility, but after a hospitalization in June she changed to bed baths due to a wound dressing. She indicated she had not been receiving bed baths consistently twice a week as preferred. Resident 61's record was reviewed on 7/7/23 at 9:17 AM. Diagnoses included a wedge compression fracture of T5-T6 vertebra, osteomyelitis of the thoracic vertebra, discitis, history of falling, unspecified abnormalities of gait and mobility, muscle weakness and the need for assistance with personal care. A review of Resident 61's current quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/12/23, indicated the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 12 (moderately impaired), she was alert, oriented and interviewable. A review of Resident 61's current care plan, last revised 6/20/23, indicated she…

    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 · D2023-07-11 · 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 interview and record review the facility failed to ensure care to a resident with a shunt, for one of one resident reviewed. (Resident 35). Findings included: During an interview on 7/7/23 at 10:23 AM, with DON (Director of Nursing), indicated Resident 35 was sent to the hospital on 7/5/23. The DON indicated nursing staff believed Resident 35 was having a stroke. The DON indicated as paramedics arrived Resident 35 had seizure activity. Resident 35 did not have a previous history of seizures. The DON indicated the hospital informed facility a shunt revision was needed. The hospital indicated the shunt was draining too quickly. A record review, on 7/7/23 at 11:56am, indicated there were no care plans in place specific to the shunt, no physician orders to watch for specific signs and symptoms of problems regarding the shunt, no nursing tasks regarding the shunt, and no diagnosis listed specific to the shunt. Resident 35 progress notes indicated she complained of a headache for 2 days prior to being sent to the hospital. Resident 35 ' s medication administration record…

    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 · D2023-07-11 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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 manage tube feeding consistently for 1 of 4 residents reviewed. (Resident 32). Findings include: Resident 32's record was reviewed on 7/6/23 at 9:53 AM, indicated her diagnoses included dysphagia and malnutrition. Resident 32's current annual MDS (minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE], indicated her BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score was 7. A score of 7 indicated moderate cognitive decline. Resident 32's nutrition assessment dated [DATE] indicated the tube feeding provided from 8pm to 4am was to equal 440cc. The 440cc of Jevity 1.5 was to provide 660Kcal (11kg) with a 40ml flush 8pm to 4am to equal 714ml free water from formula and flush. Resident 32's tube feeding was in addition to continued poor oral intake. Dietary assessment indicated daily calories need 1850(30kg), protein needs 80g (1.3g/kg) and fluids need 1900ml. Resident 32's care plan during time of survey indicated a focus: Jejunostomy tube related to impaired nutrition…

    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 · D2023-07-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure safe medication storage for 2 of 8 residents reviewed. (Resident 25, and Resident 215) Findings include: 1.During an observation on 7/5/23 at 9:13 AM the following was observed: a clear plastic cup containing an oblong white pill was sitting on Resident 25's bedside table next to his breakfast tray. Resident 25 indicated it was given to him the night before by his nurse for sleep and he forgot to take it. In an observation and interview on 7/5/23 at 11:59 AM, the Assistant Director of Nurses (ADON) removed the pill from Resident 25's bedside. She identified the pill as Trazadone 150 mg, based on its color, shape and markings. She indicated Resident 25 did not have a self-administration of medication assessment and the pill should not have been at bedside. Resident 25's record was reviewed on 7/6/23 at 2:14 PM. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease COPD), major depressive disorder, and polyneuropathy. A review of…

    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

“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 TLC MANAGEMENT — 20 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 53.8+0.2 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.3+0.7 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.5+0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.7-0.7 vs chain
The other 19 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, per CMS)

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
RIVERVIEW HOSPITALOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 08/01/2014
FRIEND, JAYNAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/01/2021
HYATT, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/28/2022
ASHTON CREEK HEALTHCARE OPERATIONS COMPANY LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2025
TENDER LOVING CARE MANAGEMENT INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
ADAMS, BRIANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2014
GIBSON, DEREKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2014
GIBSON, CULLENIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
ORRELL, JAMESIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
OTT, DWIGHTIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
OTT, GARYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/25/2025
OTT, JOHNIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
OTT, RYANIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
RAJMAIRA, SALILIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
SHOWALTER, JENNIFERIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
SRIKANTH, SHANKARANIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
OTT FAMILY TRUSTOrganizationTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2014
DIEBOLD ROAD PROPERTIES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2014

CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 18 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

5 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.

$16.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.1M
Related-party expense20% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 0%Medicare 9%Other / private 91%

This home reported $3.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% 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

$399per resident / day
operating cost
$12,133per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$410per 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 155798. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-02, 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