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

Lutheran Life Villages

6701 S Anthony Blvd, Fort Wayne, IN 46816 · Non profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (260) 447-1591 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (260) 447-1591 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Oct 2025Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0744)
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Oct 2025
  • 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
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • 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 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
5717 S Anthony Blvd · (260) 469-3984 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.5 mi
1701 E Paulding Rd · (260) 456-3429 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1004 Fayette Dr · (260) 447-1691 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1827 Seddlemeyer Ave · (260) 234-9334

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased21.3%11.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.1%5.5%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.7%0.4%0.9%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.9%1.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.2%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 worsened12.3%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.8%23.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine90.4%95.4%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.5%3.6%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control32.4%23.3%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.6%13.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine42.9%79.0%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission11.5%22.2%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.3%10.8%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.371.611.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.251.441.80better

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.

60.5% 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 60 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

60.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.6%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.24U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.14hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 32% 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 SNF60.5%CMS range 47.9–69.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.6%CMS range 6.8–15.610.7%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.5%CMS range 3.2–11.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.751.02Oct 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

0.58
RN hours/ resident / day
0.78
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.72
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.08
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.65
RN hoursweekends
33.0%
Total nursing turnover
25.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 92.8 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 27 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 4.08 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.72 is at or above 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 3.72 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.23 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.55 to 0.65 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below 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

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-29)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-10)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-10-20 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    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 safety and prevention of abuse for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident A). Findings include:Resident A's record was reviewed on 10/20/25 at 12:59 PM. Diagnoses included cognitive communication deficit and generalized anxiety disorder.Resident A's quarterly Minimum Data Set, (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 7 (moderate cognitive loss).A summary of incident report, dated 10/9/25, indicated Resident A's spouse had made contact with the Resident A's face. The report indicated Adult Protective Services had been contacted. The report indicated Resident A's daughter was concerned about the spouse's decline and attempts to correct the spouse.A progress note, dated 8/23/25 at 11:59 PM, indicated Resident A's spouse had been present when the resident's skin tear had reopened.A progress note, dated 8/27/25 at 11:59 PM, indicated Resident A had reopened a skin tear on their arm. The skin tear…

    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 · E2025-08-29 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to date medications when opened, failed to ensure treatments were placed in treatment cart, failed to ensure medication carts were free from loose pills/debris, and failed to record temperature logs for the Emergency Drug Kit/narcotic refrigerator in medication room, in 4 of 4 medication carts and 1 of 1 medication storage rooms reviewed. Findings include:During an observation on 08/26/2025 at 9:52 AM on the 100 hall medication carts with the Director of Nursing (DON) was observed. At 9:55 AM Resident 34 had an opened medication of Albuterol sulfate 30 mcg inhaler dated 1-24-25, and then another opened Albuterol sulfate 30 mcg inhaler with an opened date of 4/4/25. On the label it indicated to give 2 puff every day until 5/3/25. At 9:58 AM Resident 104 had an opened medication bottle of Antacid tablet 750 mg with no open date. At 10:01 AM Resident 43 had an opened bottle of Morphine sulfate 5 ML with a small syringe, inside a clear plastic cup. The syringe was facing downward in the cup at the bottom, it 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 · Dcited before2025-08-29 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    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 freedom from intimate touching for 2 of 19 residents reviewed (Resident 53 and Resident 99).Findings include: Resident 53's record was reviewed on 08/26/2025 1:15 PM. Diagnoses included dementia, anxiety, and sexual dysfunction. A current annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident 53 had a Basic Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 indicating cognitive impairment.A progress note dated 8/21/25 at 6:24 PM indicated staff reported inappropriate sexual behavior by Resident 53 with a male resident. The note indicated staff had intervened. No additional progress notes or assessments after 8/21/25 at 6:24 PM were documented from nursing or social services pertaining to sexual behavior.No further progress notes or assessments were available for review at the time of facility exit. A current care plan titled .impaired cognitive function . indicated Resident 53 had a problem of impaired thought…

    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 · D2025-08-29 · 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 ensure an occurrence of non-consensual intimate touching was reported for 1 of 19 residents reviewed (Resident 99). Resident 99's record was reviewed on 08/26/2025 12:52 PM. Diagnoses included dementia with behavioral disturbance and sexual dysfunction. A current annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/26/25, indicated Resident 99 had a Basic Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 4, indicating cognitive impairment. A progress note, dated 8/21/25 5:50 PM, indicated Resident 99 exhibited inappropriate sexual behavior in the dining room before the supper meal. The note indicated Resident 99 touched Resident 53 between her legs on the outside of her clothes. The note indicated staff intervened and the Resident 99 was assisted away from the situation. No notes including documentation of notification of family or Nurse Practitioner were available for review. In an interview, on 08/28/2025 9:38 AM, the Administrator indicated Resident 53 and Resident 99 had a history of sexual contact around the beginning of 2025.…

    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 · D2025-08-29 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure wound care was provided to promote healing and prevent infection for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (40).Findings include:During an observation, on 08/27/2025 10:16 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) 7 removed wound care supplies from a cart outside Resident 40's room. She carried a package of alginate wound preparation, an abdominal (ABD) pad, a package of kerlix (roll gauze used to wrap limbs), a pair of scissors, a bottle of wound cleanser and a barrier sheets into Resident 40's room. She held the items against her body as she placed a barrier sheet on the overbed table in Resident 40's room and then placed the supplies on top of the barrier prior to applying a gown and gloves. She placed another barrier sheet underneath Resident 40's right foot and removed her sock. She used the scissors to cut and remove kerlix wrapped around Resident 40's right heel. She placed the scissors back on the barrier on the overbed table. The scissors had not been…

    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 · D2025-08-29 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility the failed to ensure communication with the dialysis provider for 1 of 1 residents reviewed. (Resident 57)Findings Include:Resident 57's record was reviewed on 8/26/2025 at 1:25 PM. Diagnosis included end stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, hypertensive chronic kidney disease with stage 5 chronic kidney disease or end stage renal disease, metabolic encephalopathy and anemia in chronic kidney disease. A review of physician orders, on 8/28/2025 at 9:10AM, indicated Resident 57 needed to leave the facility for dialysis at 4 AM on Monday, Wednesday and Friday and the facility is to complete pre- and post-dialysis assessments. On 8/28/2025 at 10:59 AM, in an interview, Registered Nurse 8 (RN), indicated she had not seen a dialysis book, however she was new. RN 8 indicated she asked Licensed Practical Nurse 9 (LPN) and they indicated there was no dialysis book.On 08/28/2025 at 1:45 PM, the Administrator provided a dialysis communication book for Resident 57. The dialysis book included a Nurse Responsibilities for Dialysis…

    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 · D2025-08-29 · tag F0773 — isolated
    Provide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
    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 completion of physician ordered laboratory tests for 1 of 5 residents reviewed. (Resident 30)Findings Include:Resident 30's record was reviewed on 8/27/2025 at 9:52AM. Diagnoses included: Vitamin D Deficiency, fatty (change of) liver, other seizures and major depressive disorder single episode unspecified. Resident 30's record was reviewed on 8/28/2025 at 1:38PM. Orders included: Depakote Oral Tablet Delayed Release 250MG (Divalproex Sodium), Ammonia & Depakote Level every day shift every 2 month (s), Annual Vitamin D &TSH every day shift every 365 days(s) for April and Hepatic & Lipid panel every day shift every 6 month(s). On 08/28/2025 at 10:28 AM, in an interview, the Administrator, indicated the facility had identified an issue with the Medication Administration Record (MAR) not notifying staff labs needed to be drawn. On 8/28/2025 at 1:36PM, in an interview, the Administrator, indicated she was providing the labs she was able to locate. The Administrator indicated she was not able to find any additional lab…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-23 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the root cause of falls was assessed, care plan interventions were developed and implemented to prevent further falls from occurring for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident B). Findings include: A report, dated 6/5/25, indicated Resident B had 2 falls, within a couple days, resulting in a fractured leg. Resident B's family member alleged the facility hadn't provided adequate supervision and care to prevent the falls and injury. On 6/23/25 at 11:41 A.M., Resident B's record was reviewed. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's dementia and post-hip fixation after a fall causing fracture. The resident was admitted to the facility for rehabilitation with a goal of discharging back to her daughter's home where she had lived. A nursing admission screen form, dated 5/8/25 at 10:26 a.m., indicated Resident B was alert and oriented to self and time; had short-term memory issues; used briefs for bladder and bowel incontinence; had unsteady gait, weakness, poor balance; and was to stand/pivot/sit using her left leg only.…

    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 · D2025-05-29 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was assessed and the physician notified timely following acute changes in condition, advance directives for transfer to a hospital were followed, and physician orders followed for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident B). Findings include: A report, dated 5/21/25 at 12:41 p.m., indicated Resident B had been transferred to the hospital where she passed away. A family member alleged the resident hadn't been assessed and sent to the hospital timely, per the resident's advanced directives, when she required emergency care for a change in condition. The family member alleged the resident had been administered a higher dosage of medication than prescribed which she believed, led to the resident's demise. She alleged when family spoke with facility staff about the medication, the staff's explanations were inconsistent as was documentation of the administered medication in the resident's medical record. On 5/28/25 at 11:43 A.M., Resident B's…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-10 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
    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 dementia care and services was provided to 2 of 3 residents reviewed for dementia care (Resident J and Resident K). Findings include: On 3/10/25 at 10:30 A.M., the secured Memory Care Unit (MCU) was toured. Several residents were observed seated at tables in the dining room/activity area. Some were sleeping while others stared blankly ahead. There were no activities occurring. A television, mounted on the wall was not turned on and there was no music played. In one corner of the room, on shelves, were games and other activity equipment. The equipment was not being used by any residents in the area. One resident was observed standing near one of the tables, repetitively wiping the table while his table mate sat across from him looking on. A female resident, with a white/yellow substance on her teeth and lips, sat at another table fidgeting with her hair and clothing while another female resident, was propelling her wheelchair 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 · D2023-10-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident received appropriate oxygen therapy for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Resident 74). Findings include: During an observation on 9/26/22 at 11:18 AM, Resident 74 was in her wheelchair with oxygen at 3 liters per minute (LPM) on nasal cannula (tubing used to deliver oxygen through the nostrils) by her portable oxygen concentrator (a light, small and quiet device that allows you to receive supplemental oxygen). During an observation on 9/27/22 at 10:51 AM, Resident 74 was in her wheelchair with oxygen at 3 LPM via nasal cannula. During an observation on 9/28/22 at 9:57 AM, Resident 74 was in her wheelchair with oxygen at 3 LPM via nasal cannula. On 09/29/23 at 10:18 AM, Resident 74's record was reviewed. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), hypothyroidism, obesity, and a personal history of COVID-19. Resident 74's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/22/23, indicated the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 4…

    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.

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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
ADAIR, HEIDIIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2020
BLEKE, RONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2022
BOHNKE, BRYANIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2023
FINK, JANEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2022
GOTSCH, DEBBIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2019
GROTE, RANDYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2016
HANKE, CHRISIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2018
LINNEMEIER, CRAIGIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2016
NEHRING, EMILYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2024
PARK, ALISONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2018
RUSH, KEVINIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2024
TESKA, LOWELLIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2020
TRENT, TOMIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2022
WALDA, CHRISIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2025
FLUECKIGER, RUSSELLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2006
MACKLIN, LARRYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2008
SMITH, SCOTTIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2020
SPRUNGER, KYLEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2018
WHEELER, DANEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2012
ADAMS COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITALOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2012
FORVIS MAZARS LLPOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023
HEALTHCARE THERAPY SERVICES INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2012
LUTHERAN HOMES, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2012
BORNE-BAUMAN, CANDICEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
KIEFER, ALEXANDERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2012
KINTANAR, THOMASIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2012
LEHMAN, SCOTTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/14/2020
MCINTIRE, DAVIDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
MESSMANN, GREGIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2021
NEARY, TRICIAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2023
PRICE, MARKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/22/2020
BLUE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2024
FIRST BANK OF BERNEOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2020
OMNICARE LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 07/19/2017

CMS files one row per role, so the 67 rows in the source record cover these 34 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.

7 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.

$13.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-11.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.0M
Related-party expense20% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 42%Medicare 1%Other / private 57%

This home reported $3.0M 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

$272per resident / day
operating cost
$8,273per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$244per 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 155586. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-29, 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