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

Greenwood Healthcare Center

377 Westridge Blvd, Greenwood, IN 46142 · Government - Hospital district · 185 certified beds · (317) 888-4948 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (317) 888-4948 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Feb 20251 immediate-jeopardy citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$8,278 in federal fines
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)
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2025
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $8,278 in federal fines (most recent 2025-05-08)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 35% 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3100 Meridian Parke Dr · (317) 886-7068 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1701 Library Blvd Ste A · (317) 881-9923 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2801 Fairview Pl · (317) 884-6292 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1300 Fry Rd · (317) 887-5000 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 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 held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased3.7%11.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.6%5.5%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%0.4%0.9%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.0%25.2%6.5%typical
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 injury2.7%3.9%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened3.5%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication37.2%23.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.2%95.4%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.0%3.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control27.3%23.3%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.6%13.6%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine40.6%79.0%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.3%22.2%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit15.3%10.8%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.971.611.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.061.441.80better

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.

10.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
66.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.25U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.11hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 66.7% 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 24 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 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 34% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% 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 SNFnot 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 SNF10.3%CMS range 6.2–15.910.7%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 discharge66.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge41.7%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge37.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified97.8%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 setting95.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final 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 hospitalizationnot 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 SNFs1.241.02Oct 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

0.49
RN hours/ resident / day
0.86
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.28
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.64
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.39
RN hoursweekends
36.8%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 185 beds and averages 166.1 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 19 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 3.64 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.28 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 3.34 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.76 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.54 to 0.39 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-01)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-12)

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-05-08 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent a resident that resided on a secured memory care unit and was to be receiving one to one staff supervision for exit seeking behavior, from exiting the secured memory care unit through a window in another resident's room. The resident was found by staff approximately 2 miles from the facility. (Resident B) The Immediate Jeopardy began on April 27, 2025, when Resident B exited the secured memory care unit through another residents window. The Administrator, Regional Nurse, and Assistant Director of Nursing were notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on May 6, 2025 at 2:00 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed, and the deficient practice corrected, on 4/28/25, prior to the start of the survey and was therefore Past Noncompliance. Finding includes: On 5/6/25 at 8:32 a.m., observed Resident B's room. Just past the door and to the left was the restroom. CNA 1 was sitting in a chair just past the restroom. The…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2025-07-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was not stored beneath a water line on which water had condensed for 2 of 2 observations of the kitchen freezer. Findings include: During a tour of the facility's walk-in freezer, on 6/24/25 at 2:15 p.m. and 7/1/25 at 10:30 a.m., food was observed to be stored beneath the freezer condenser water line, upon which water had condensed and ice had formed. Beneath the freezer condenser were three boxes of cookie dough, two boxes of pizza dough, and two boxes of dinner rolls. Ice had fallen from the frozen condenser line onto the boxes. During an interview on 6/24/25 at 10:35 a.m., the Dietary Manager indicated there was ice formed on the leaking condenser and food was stored beneath the condenser. During an interview on 6/24/25 at 10:45 a.m., the facility Administrator indicated the facility used the Indiana State Department of Health Retail Food Establishment Sanitation Requirements, effective date, November 13, 2004, as the facility policy and procedure regarding food storage. A review of the policy…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-01 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the 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 ensure the resident's representative and physician were notified of significant weight loss for 2 of 7 residents reviewed for nutrition. (Resident 5, Resident 85) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 6/26/25 at 10:09 a.m., Resident 5 was observed to be eating a snack. During an observation on 6/26/25 at 12:37 p.m., Resident 5 was observed to be feeding herself a pureed diet. During an observation on 6/30/25 at 1:02 p.m., Resident 5 was observed to be feeding herself. On 6/26/25 at 11:05 a.m., Resident 5's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and anemia. The Weights and Vitals Summary indicated the following: - On 5/6/25 at 4:05 p.m., Resident 5's weight was 111 pounds. - On 6/6/25 at 3:42 p.m., Resident 5's weight was 102 pounds. This was 8.11% weight loss in one month. The care plan, dated 1/29/25, indicated Resident 5 had altered nutritional status due to Alzheimer's disease and dementia. The intervention was to notify medical…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-01 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    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 accuracy of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 2 of 32 residents reviewed for accuracy of the MDS assessments. (Resident 12, Resident 152) Findings include: 1. On 6/26/25 at 11:52 a.m., Resident 12's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (a progressive lung disease that makes it hard to breathe due to airflow blockage), dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), and dementia (a decline in mental ability severe enough to interfere with daily life). A review of the Discharge MDS assessment, dated 6/18/25, did not indicate the resident had a significant weight loss (5% or more in the last 30 days or 10% or more in the last 180 days), in section K0300: Weight Loss. A review of a dietary progress note, dated 6/14/25, indicated Resident 12 had a significant weight loss in the last 180 days. The resident had a 16.8% weight loss in 90 days and a 10% weight loss in 180 days. During an interview with the MDS Coordinator on 7/1/25 at 10:55 a.m.,…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-01 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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 ensure the care plan was revised for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident 92) Finding include: During an observation on 6/26/25 at 12:20 p.m., Resident 92 was observed to be ambulating with her walker. The walker was observed not to have bright colored tape on it. During an observation on 6/26/25 at 2:03 p.m., Resident 92 was observed to be ambulating with her walker. The walker was observed not to have bright colored tape on it. During an observation on 6/27/25 at 12:04 p.m., Resident 92 was observed to be resting in bed with the walker at bedside. The walker was observed not to have bright colored tape on it. During an observation on 6/30/25 at 10:13 a.m., Resident 92 was observed to be ambulating with her walker. The walker was observed not to have bright colored tape on it. During an observation on 6/30/25 at 12:38 p.m., Resident 92 was observed to be in the dining room with her walker. The walker was observed not to have the bright colored tape on it. On 6/26/25 at 2:28 p.m., the clinical…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff provided the services for a resident to maintain good personal hygiene (Resident 109) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Finding includes: During an interview on 6/24/25 at 3:16 p.m., Resident 109's toenails were observed to be very long in length and thick in texture. He indicated they were bothering him and he needed them clipped by someone because he could not reach his feet. On 6/27/25 at 11:06 a.m., Resident 109's toenails were observed to be very long in length and thick in texture. On 6/25/25 at 10:02 a.m., Resident 109's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, diabetes mellitus, morbid (severe) obesity, and osteoarthritis. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 4/13/25, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. A 10/15/23 physician's order, indicated the resident was ordered podiatry consults as needed. The resident's clinical record lack documentation the resident had received podiatry services.…

    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 · D2025-02-07 · 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

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's rights to be free from physical abuse by a staff member for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. A staff member held down the residents arms to provide care. (Resident B, CNA 1) Finding includes: During an interview on 2/7/25 at 10:30 a.m., the Administrator (ADM) indicated CNA 1 was recently terminated for physically holding down Resident B's wrists/arms during resident care. She indicated Resident B had become combative during care and the CNA held down Resident B's limbs to prevent an injury to herself. On 2/7/25 at 10:45 a.m., Resident B's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and anxiety disorder. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 12/26/24, indicated Resident B had severe cognitive impairment. A progress note, dated 1/23/25 at 12:00 p.m., indicated the resident was receiving care and the hospice aid became concerned with the CNA's technique. During an interview on 2/7/25 at 12:00 p.m., CNA 1 indicated 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-12 · tag F0623 — pattern
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    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 the written notification required for a transfer and discharge was provided to the resident and/or the resident representative for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalization and discharge. (Resident 96, Resident 148, Resident 145, and Resident 160) Findings include: 1. On 8/9/24 at 1:00 p.m., Resident 96's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, opioid dependence and acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (an absence of enough oxygen in the tissues to sustain bodily functions). Residents 96's transfer forms indicated the resident was sent to the hospital on 5/12/24 and 6/23/24. The clinical record lacked documentation of written Notice of Transfer and Discharge forms having been provided to the resident and/or the resident representative. 2. On 8/12/24 at 2:27 p.m., Resident 148's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, asthma, tracheostomy (procedure to help air and oxygen reach the lungs by creating an opening into the trachea…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-12 · tag F0625 — pattern
    Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
    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 notification of the bed-hold policy required for a resident who transferred to the hospital was provided in writing to the resident or the resident representative for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalization and discharge. (Resident 96, Resident 148, Resident 145, and Resident 160) Findings include: 1. On 8/9/24 at 1:00 p.m., Resident 96's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, opioid dependence and acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (an absence of enough oxygen in the tissues to sustain bodily functions). Residents 96's transfer forms, indicated the resident was sent to the hospital on 5/12/24 and 6/23/24. The clinical record lacked documentation of written notification of the bed-hold policy having been provided to the resident or the resident representative. 2. On 8/12/24 at 2:27 p.m., Resident 148's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, asthma, tracheostomy (procedure to help air and oxygen reach the lungs by creating…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-12 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow 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 ensure a resident could self-administer medication for 1 of 1 randomly observed resident (Resident 38). Finding include: On 8/7/24 at 2:41 p.m., Resident 38 was observed to be resting in her bed. A bottle of Tums (antacid) was observed to be on her bedside table. On 8/8/24 at 11:15 a.m., Resident 38 was observed to be resting in her bed. A bottle of Tums was observed to be on her bedside table. On 8/12/24 at 10:58 a.m., Resident 38 was observed to be resting in bed with a bottle of Tums lying in bed beside her. On 8/12/24 at 11:37 a.m., Resident 38's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, end stage renal disease (ESRD) and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). The Self Administration of Medication Assessment, dated 10/14/22 at 12:20 p.m., indicated Resident 38 could administer Halls throat lozenges. The Order Summary Report, dated 8/12/24, lacked a physician order for Tums or to self-administer medication. The care plan lacked a care plan to self-administer…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-12 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolated
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided an adequately lit, homelike environment for 1 of 7 units reviewed for environmental concerns. (Unit G) On the following dates and times the main hallway of the secured Unit G was observed to have dim, flickering overhead fluorescent lights, and dark colored walls void of homelike decor or adornment: - On 8/6/24 at 12:35 p.m. - On 8/6/24 at 2:40 p.m. - On 8/7/24 at 10:40 a.m. - On 8/7/24 at 12:50 p.m. - On 8/7/24 at 3:05 p.m. - On 8/8/24 at 9:28 a.m. - On 8/8/24 at 2:26 p.m. - On 8/9/24 at 12:27 p.m. - On 8/9/24 at 3:10 p.m. - On 8/12/24 at 9:45 a.m. - On 8/12/24 at 12:05 p.m. Confidential interviews were conducted during the course of the survey from 8/6/24 through 8/12/24. These interviews indicated the secured Unit G was consistently dimly lit with flickering overhead fluorescent lights. The hallway walls were dark and lacked decor indicative of a homelike environment. During an interview on 8/12/24 at 12:15 p.m., the Administrator indicated the main hallway of the secured…

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

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-27 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate reconciliation and accounting for narcotics (controlled medications) were performed for 2 of 3 shifts reviewed. (LPN 2, LPN 3, RN 4) Findings include: On 3/26/24 at 9:00 a.m., Resident D's clinical record was reviewed. Resident D's physician orders included, but were not limited to, oxycodone (narcotic/controlled pain medication) 5 mg (milligrams) every 8 hours as needed for pain, started on 2/22/24 and discontinued on 2/23/24. The February Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicated Resident D had not received any oxycodone pain medication during the month of February. During an interview on 3/26/24 at 10:05 a.m., the Assistant Director of Nursing Services (ADNS) indicated the facility Controlled Drug Administration Record reflected no oxycodone were administered to Resident D. Additionally, the 30 oxycodone tablets were missing from the narcotic box. The number of tablets in the lock box and paper document should have matched. During an interview on 3/26/24 at 10:20 a.m., the ADNS indicated 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-30 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow 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 ensure medications were not left at bedside without a self medication administration assessment for 1 of 1 random observations.(Resident 79) Finding includes: During an interview on 6/27/23 at 11:30 a.m., with Resident 79, a medicine cup full of pills was observed to be sitting on the bedside table. The resident indicated the nurse dropped them off that morning and had not left any water nor had she split the potassium in half as required by the resident to swallow the pill. During an interview on 6/27/23 at 11:45 a.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 indicated she should have stayed with Resident 79 to watch her take the morning medications. LPN 1 indicated Resident 79 was not assessed to self administer medications. Resident 79's clinical record was reviewed on 6/27/23 at 11:50 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and peripheral vascular disease. Current physician orders, dated June, 2023, indicated Resident 79's medications included, but were not limited to: -…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-30 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    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 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments accurately reflected resident status for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. Level 2 PASRR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) and discharge status were coded incorrectly. (Resident 25, Resident 38, Resident 166) Findings include: 1. On 6/30/23 at 11:40 a.m., Resident 25's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder. The Level 2 PASRR, dated 7/19/21 indicated, You meet PASRR criteria based on your diagnoses, current symptoms, and treatment needs including recent medication management. The Annual MDS assessment, dated 9/23/22, indicated, Has the resident been evaluated by level 2 PASRR and determined to have a serious mental illness and/or mental retardation or related condition .no. 2. On 6/30/23 at 11:50 a.m., Resident 38's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, schizoaffective disorders and dementia. The Level 2 PASRR, dated…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-30 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop 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 ensure a care plan was in place for a resident who was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for urinary tract infections. (Resident 34, Resident 151) Findings include: 1. Resident 34's clinical record was reviewed on 6/30/23 at 11:00 a.m. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, adult failure to thrive. Current physician orders, dated June 2023, indicated Resident 34 was taking amoxicillin-pot clavulanate (an antibiotic) tablet 875-125 milligrams 1 tablet by mouth every 12 hours for Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamase (ESBL) in the urine. The start date was 6/23/23. The Infection Surveillance Criteria Report, dated 6/29/23, indicated Resident 34 was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection (UTI). A lab report, dated 6/22/23, indicated Resident 34 had greater than 100,000 escherichia coli ESBL which indicated the resident had a UTI. A review of the care plans on 6/30/23 at 12:00 p.m., for Resident 34 lacked documentation of a current care plan for a urinary tract infection. 2. During an…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning 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

$8,278 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,278 — penalty dated 2025-05-08

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to COMMUNICARE HEALTH — 110 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.2-0.2 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.7+0.3 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.6-0.6 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.5-0.5 vs chain
The other 109 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
1 of 5Allen View Healthcare CenterSpringfield, OH 1 of 5Annandale Healthcare CenterAnnandale, VA 1 of 5Canfield Healthcare CenterYoungstown, OH 1 of 5Dixon Healthcare CenterWintersville, OH 1 of 5Holbrook Healthcare CenterBuckhannon, WV 1 of 5Mount Vernon Healthcare CenterAlexandria, VA 1 of 5Southwood Healthcare CenterTerre Haute, IN 1 of 5Summers Healthcare CenterHinton, WV 1 of 5Valley View Healthcare CenterElkhart, IN 2 of 5Allison Pointe Healthcare CenterIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Battlefield Park Healthcare CenterPetersburg, VA 2 of 5Beckley Healthcare CenterBeckley, WV 2 of 5Belmont Healthcare CenterBelmont, WV 2 of 5Berkeley Springs Healthcare CenterBerkeley Springs, WV 2 of 5Cedars Healthcare CenterCharlottesville, VA 2 of 5Columbus Healthcare CenterColumbus, OH 2 of 5Crestwood Care CenterShelby, OH 2 of 5Cumberland Healthcare CenterCumberland, MD 2 of 5Eagle Pointe Healthcare CenterParkersburg, WV 2 of 5Ellicott City Healthcare CenterEllicott City, MD 2 of 5Evergreen Crossing And The LoftsIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Grande Pointe Healthcare CommuRichmond Heights, OH 2 of 5Great Lakes Healthcare CenterDyer, IN 2 of 5Greenbrier Health CenterParma Heights, OH 2 of 5Hagerstown Healthcare CenterHagerstown, MD 2 of 5Hanover Healthcare CenterMassillon, OH 2 of 5Holly Hill Healthcare CenterTowson, MD 2 of 5Keyser Healthcare CenterKeyser, WV 2 of 5Mercer Healthcare CenterBluefield, WV 2 of 5Morgantown Healthcare CenterMorgantown, WV 2 of 5Mount Airy Nursing and Rehab CenterMount Airy, MD 2 of 5Petersburg Healthcare CenterPetersburg, VA 2 of 5Riverside Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterDayton, OH 2 of 5Rolling Hills Healthcare CenterNew Albany, IN 2 of 5Salem West Healthcare CenterSalem, OH 2 of 5Wedgewood Healthcare CenterClarksville, IN 2 of 5Westminster Rehabilitation and Wellness CenterWestminster, MD 2 of 5Wildwood Healthcare CenterIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Worthington Healthcare CenterParkersburg, WV 2 of 5Wyant Woods Healthcare CenterAkron, OH

Showing 40 of 109; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
HANCOCK REGIONAL HOSPITALOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 07/01/2013
BOND, MARIAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/01/2021
CLARK, TIMOTHYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/01/2015
DAUGHERTY, JOSHUAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2020
FELKER, DEANIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/01/2015
JOYNER, SARAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2022
LONG, STEVENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/13/2022
WILLARD, LACEYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/01/2022
WILSON, ROYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/01/2015
WESTRIDGE MGT CO LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2017
ODENTHAL, RICHARDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2017
RADADIYA, PRAGNESHKUMARIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/30/2025
TURNER, LINDAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/13/2021
OMEGA HEALTHCARE INVESTORS INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2017
OMG IN MSTR LSCO LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 07/30/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 28 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

$26.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$9.1M
Related-party expense35% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 72%Medicare 2%Other / private 26%

About 72% 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 $9.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 35% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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

$437per resident / day
operating cost
$13,271per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$446per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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 155193. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-01, 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