Arbor Grove Village
1021 E Central Ave, Greensburg, IN 47240 · Non profit - Corporation · 83 certified beds · (812) 663-8553 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Jul 2025
- a high number of inspection citations overall (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| 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 fell from 4 to 3 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 4.4% | 11.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.8% | 5.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.1% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 56.2% | 25.2% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 2.2% | 0.0% | 0.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 8.7% | 3.9% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.2% | 11.9% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 28.5% | 23.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.4% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.1% | 3.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.4% | 23.3% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 15.6% | 13.6% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.1% | 79.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 22.2% | 22.2% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 16.6% | 10.8% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.71 | 1.61 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.49 | 1.44 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
Met the expected recovery: 60.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 25 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 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.3%CMS range 7.6–18.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 60.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 40.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 56.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 97.1% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | not 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 discharge | not 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 stay | 2.9% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.9% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.10 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 83 beds and averages 75.9 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.78 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.554 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.44 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 3.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.05 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
17 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-24 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a homelike environment related to hot water temperatures. This deficient practice had the potential to effect 75 of 75 residents residing in the facility. Findings include:During an observation, on 04/20/2026 at 9:51 A.M., in room [ROOM NUMBER] the bathroom sink water was tested for water temperature. The water in the residents bathroom sink was immediately too hot to place your hands under the water without discomfort or redness. During an observation, on 04/20/2026 at 9:54 A.M., in room [ROOM NUMBER] the bathroom sink water was tested for water temperature. The water in the residents bathroom sink was too hot to place your hands under the water without discomfort or redness.During an observation, on 04/20/2026 at 10:04 A.M., in room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER] the shared a bathroom sink water was tested for water temperature. The water in the residents bathroom sink was too hot to place your hands under the water without discomfort or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-24 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — patternProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and observation, the facility failed to educate a resident and follow appropriate infection control guidelines related to urinary care for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for Urinary Tract Infections (UTIs) and indwelling urinary catheters. (Residents 5, 4, 27, and 56)Findings include:1. During an interview, on 04/20/2026 at 11:31 A.M., Resident 5 indicated she had recently been on an antibiotic for a UTI. It currently burned when she urinated and her urine was milky yellow in color. During an interview, on 04/22/2026 at 10:52 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 4 indicated the resident required stand-by assistance of one staff member for toileting. The resident preferred to be independent with toileting. The staff had educated her on wiping from front to back. The clinical record was reviewed on 04/21/2026 at 3:04 P.M. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/10/2026, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The resident required substantial assistance from staff members for hygiene and was frequently incontinent of bowel…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-24 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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 assess a resident to self-administer medications for 2 of 19 residents reviewed for self-administration of medications. (Residents 34 and 73)Findings include:1. During an observation and interview, on 04/21/2026 at 9:07 A.M., Resident 34 was sitting in her chair, in her room. The resident had a medication cup full of medications sitting on her over the bed table. She indicated the medications were her morning medications. The staff would normally leave them on her table so she could take them with her breakfast or after she was done eating. During an observation and interview, on 04/23/2026 at 9:02 A.M., the resident was sitting in her chair in her room, there was a cup full of medication sitting on her over bed table. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 9 indicated the resident's medications should not have been left at her bedside table. The resident should have had a physician's order for the medications and an assessment to self-administer medications. During an interview, on 04/23/2026 at 9:05 A.M., LPN 9…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-24 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
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 accommodate the needs of a resident related to call light availability for a resident with frequent falls for 1 of 19 residents reviewed for accommodations of needs. (Resident 9) Findings include: During an observation, on 04/20/2026 at 9:43 A.M., Resident 9 was asleep in bed in her room. No call lights were available for the resident. A touch pad call light and a push button call light were on the floor under the turn-off system hanging on the wall. Neither call light would be reachable by the resident. During an observation and interview, on 04/21/2026 at 2:54 P.M., the resident's room door was closed. A therapy associate in the hallway indicated Resident 9's roommate liked the room door to stay closed. If staff members left the door open, the roommate would get up and close it. During an observation, on 04/22/2026 at 11:02 A.M., the resident was sitting in her recliner in her room. Her head was tilted back and her eyes were closed. Her wheelchair was sitting in front of the recliner, and her feet were…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop or implement care planned interventions related to hearing aids and implanted medical devices for 2 of 21 residents reviewed for Care Plans. (Residents 48 and 56)Findings include:1. During an interview, on 04/21/2026 at 10:26 A.M., Resident 48 indicated she did have some hearing loss. She received hearing aids last year. She didn't wear them because she was not sure how to adjust them. On 04/22/2026 at 9:42 A.M., the resident was observed in bed in her room. She indicated she thought her hearing aids were on a shelf near her bed. The CNAs (Certified Nurse Aides) never asked her about them, she didn't think they even knew she had them. The resident's hearing aids were observed in a case on a shelf of the plastic storage unit. The case was plugged in and was covered in a thin layer of dust. During an interview, on 04/22/2026 at 9:48 A.M., CNA 3 indicated that if a resident had hearing aids, she would ask if they wanted to wear them as part of routine Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care. She would assist them with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-24 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 update or revise residents' care plans related to hearing aids and preventative measures related to skin impairments for 2 of 21 residents reviewed for care plan revisions. (Residents 48 and 12)Findings include:1. During an interview, on 04/21/2026 at 10:26 A.M., Resident 48 indicated she did have some hearing loss. She got hearing aids last year. She didn't wear them because she was not sure how to adjust them.On 04/22/2026 at 9:42 A.M., the resident was observed in bed in her room. She indicated she thought her hearing aids were on a shelf near her bed. The CNAs (Certified Nurse Aides) never asked her about them, she didn't think they even knew she had them. The resident's hearing aids were observed in a case on a shelf of the plastic storage unit. The case was plugged in and was covered in a thin layer of dust. During an interview, on 04/22/2026 at 9:48 A.M., CNA 3 indicated that if a resident had hearing aids, she would ask if they wanted to wear them as part of routine Activities of Daily Living (ADL)…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to have ongoing communication and collaboration with the dialysis center regarding a residents prescribed medications during dialysis care days for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for dialysis services. (Resident 4) Findings include:The clinical record for Resident 4 was reviewed on 04/22/2026 at 3:44 P.M. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/08/2026, indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, end stage renal disease (permanent, stage 5 chronic kidney failure, where kidneys function below 10 to 15% and cannot support life, requiring regular dialysis or a kidney transplant), hypertension (high blood pressure), hypokalemia (a condition characterized by low blood potassium levels, essential for nerve, muscle, and heart function), atrial fibrillation (a common heart rhythm disorder characterized by rapid, chaotic electrical signals causing the upper chambers (atria) to quiver instead of beating effectively, resulting in an irregular, fast…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-24 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 administer medications appropriately and have medications available for 2 of 22 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. (Residents 82 and 77)Findings include:1. During an observation, on 04/23/2026 at 9:00 A.M., Registered Nurse (RN) 11 provided a treatment to Resident 82. After the treatment was complete, there was a medication cup observed on the resident's over the bed table that contained two pink tablets. RN 11 gave the medications to the resident. During an interview, on 04/23/2026 at 11:42 A.M., RN 11 indicated the tablets she gave the resident in her room were antacids. There was a nurse in training, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 12, that had prepared the medications and took them to the resident before she went into the resident's room to complete the treatment. She asked the nurse to wait to give her the medications until after she was done with her treatment. Usually, the nurse who prepared the medication was the nurse that…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-18 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure misappropriation of resident's medications did not occur for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for misappropriation. (Resident B and Resident C) Findings include:1. During an interview, on 07/18/25 at 9:18 A.M., Registered Nurse (RN) 2 indicated that Resident B requested pain medication on 06/19/25 around 10:00 P.M While administering the medication she noticed the pills popped out of the card lightly. Upon observation, she identified tape on the back of the card holding in the two pills she had dispensed. Both pills were different shapes and upon observation one had a small, scratched mark in the center of it to make it appear scored. She immediately contacted the Director of Nursing (DON) and notified her of the findings. After she checked the entire medication cart for other discrepancies, she determined Resident C also had a medication taped back into his narcotic medication card. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 07/18/2025 10:20 AM. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/02/25,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 maintain resident snack refrigerators appropriately related to the storage of staff food items, incomplete labeling, and the storage of non-food items for 2 of 3 resident snack refrigerators observed. (100/200 Hall Resident Snack Refrigerator and the 400 Hall Resident Snack Refrigerator) Findings include: 1. The 100/200 Hall Resident Snack Refrigerator was observed on 04/28/25 at 12:38 P.M., with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 7, and contained the following: - LPN 7's lunch bag, - One unopened carton of vanilla ice cream with no resident name, date, or room number, - One opened carton of vanilla ice cream dated 03/11/25 with no resident name or room number, - A tan plastic grocery bag with a paper note labeled with Qualified Medication Aide (QMA) 4's name and the numbers, 3-12 to 6-12, as identified by LPN 7, and - One long, over 12 inches, black ice pack with no resident name. The signage on the front of the refrigerator indicated the REFRIGERATOR RULES included, but were not limited to, For Residents &…
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.
Show the remaining 7 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-28 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide 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, observation, and record review, the facility failed to prevent pressure ulcers and implement Care Plan interventions for a resident who was at risk for pressure ulcers for 1 of 5 residents reviewed. (Resident 23) Findings include: During an interview and observation, on 04/22/25 at 12:41 P.M., Resident 23 indicated he had sores on both of his heels, and it felt like pins and needles were sticking into them. His heels were lying flat against the bed mattress. No soft boots or extra pillows were noted in the visible area. The resident indicated staff did not put a pillow behind his calves to keep the pressure off his heels or put soft boots on his feet. During an observation, on 04/23/25 at 3:45 P.M., the resident was lying in bed with his eyes closed, flat on his back with his heels flat against the bed mattress. No extra pillows or soft boots were noted on the floor or in the immediate area. During an observation, on 04/24/25 at 9:42 A.M., the resident was lying in bed with his eyes closed,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-28 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician prescribed medications were available for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. (Residents 23 and 35) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident 23 was reviewed on 04/24/25 at 10:49 A.M. The resident's admission dated was 02/25/25. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/21/25, indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, heart failure, obstructive uropathy, diabetes, and depression. The Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR) indicated the resident had a physician's order, with a start date of 02/25/25 and a discontinued date of 04/07/25, for Modafinil 100 milligrams (mg) once a day for a diagnosis of major depressive disorder. The medication was not administered on the following dates due to the medication not being available: - 02/26/25, - 02/27/25, - 02/28/25, - 03/01/25, - 03/02/25, - 03/03/25, -…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-28 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow physician's orders related to a Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR) of a medication for 1 of 18 residents reviewed for quality of care. (Resident 47) Findings include: Resident 47's clinical record was reviewed on 04/23/35 at 2:00 P.M. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 02/05/25, indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, dementia, psychotic disorder, and depression. The resident experienced hallucinations. The resident's medication orders as of 01/15/25 included, but were not limited to, the following: - An open-ended order, with a start date of 07/12/24, for Risperdal (an antipsychotic medication). The resident received 1 milligram (mg) of the medication in the morning and 0.5 mg in the evening, and - An open-ended order, with a start date of 11/21/24, for sertraline (an antidepressant medication). The resident received 150 mg at bedtime. An Evaluation for Gradual Dose Reduction of Psychotropic Medication, dated 01/15/25, recommended…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-28 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to completely and accurately document the assessment and monitoring of a resident after a fall for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Resident Records. (Resident 58) Findings include: During an interview, on 04/23/25 at 1:03 P.M., Resident 58 and the resident's family member indicated the resident had fallen three times in three weeks. The family member was present for one of the falls and indicated the resident was standing with her walker when she started to feel shaky and fell to the floor. The family member notified staff at the time of the fall. The resident's clinical record was reviewed on 04/25/25 at 2:20 P.M. An Annual Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 02/11/25, indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, hypertension, overactive bladder, and weakness. The resident used a walker and wheelchair. The resident required partial to moderate staff assistance to move from a sitting to a standing position and required staff supervision or touching…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to follow physician's orders related to hold parameters for a resident's blood pressure medication for 1 of 18 residents reviewed for quality of care. (Resident 34) Findings include: A Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 02/24/24, indicated Resident 34 was severely cognitively impaired. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Parkinson's disease, dementia, and hypertension. The resident's current physician's orders included an opened-ended order, with a start date of 11/16/22, for staff to administer Resident 34's losartan (a blood pressure medication). The resident was to receive 100 mg (milligrams) once a day. The medication was to be held if his SBP (Systolic Blood Pressure) was less than 110. The March and April 2024 EMAR (Electronic Medication Administration Records) indicated the resident received the medication when his SBP was less than 110 on the following dates: - On 03/14/24, the resident's SBP was 101, - On 03/30/24, the resident's SBP was 104, - On 04/08/24, the resident's SBP…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-17 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 medications were available and document medication administration for 1 of 14 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. (Resident 1) Findings include: 1.a. During an observation and interview on 05/17/24 at 12:57 P.M., Resident 1 was sitting in his wheelchair in his room. The resident had no current concerns with receiving his medications. The clinical record for Resident 1 was reviewed on 05/16/24 at 9:46 P.M. An Annual MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 02/26/24, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, seizure disorder, depression, hypertension, and spinal stenosis. An open-ended physician's order, with a start date of 05/04/23, indicated the resident was to have phenytoin (an anticonvulsant medication) 150 mg (milligrams), adminiustered three times a day. The April and May 2024 EMAR/ETAR (Electronic Medication Administration/Electronic Treatment Administration Record) indicated the medication was not administered due to 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 label and store medications appropriately for 1 of 2 medication storage refrigerators observed. (100/200 Hall Medication Storage Refrigerator) Findings include: The Medication Room for the 100/200 Halls was observed with RN 3 on 05/17/24 at 1:07 P.M. The 100/200 Hall Medication Storage Refrigerator contained an open vial of TB (Tuberculin) serum with no label indicating when it was opened. The vial was one quarter full. During an interview on 05/17/24 at 1:17 P.M., RN 3 indicated the TB serum package indicated the vial was received from the pharmacy on 04/10/23. The serum was good for 28 or 30 days after it was opened. There was no opened on date on the vial of serum, the box the serum came in, or the plastic bag the box was in. The serum should have been labeled when it was first opened. She was unsure of when the TB serum was last administered. The serum was received over a year ago. The TB serum package insert was provided by the DON (Director of Nursing on 05/17/24 at 2:28 P.M. The directions for storage…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES — 90 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 3.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 3.4 | -1.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
The other 89 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 89; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| DRUMMER, CARL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2017 |
| FEHRIBACH, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 12/14/2004 |
| HANIFY, THOMAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2022 |
| LAZARD, ROBERT | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/29/2021 |
| MANTRAVADI, GEETA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 07/21/2021 |
| MUKES-GAITHER, BEVERLY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2022 |
| PAYNE, MONICA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 08/09/2021 |
| BABCOCK, PAUL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/30/2020 |
| CAINE, VIRGINIA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/10/1994 |
| HARRIS, LISA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 12/22/2003 |
| AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/09/2026 |
| BANKS, CHRISTINA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/25/2025 |
| DICE, MARK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| MCKINLEY, DEBRA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/09/2026 |
| VAN CAMP, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| WOLFRAM, DONALD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2026 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 78% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $760K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in IN
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.
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 155625. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-24, 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.