Altenheim Health & Living Community
3525 E Hanna Ave, Indianapolis, IN 46237 · Government - County · 87 certified beds · (317) 788-4261 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (57%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 30% 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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.
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 | 5.3% | 11.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.1% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| 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 | 2.4% | 1.1% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 7.8% | 25.2% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.8% | 3.9% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 0.9% | 11.9% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.2% | 23.5% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.7% | 95.4% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.1% | 3.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.9% | 23.3% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.7% | 13.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.2% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 83.5% | 79.0% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.4% | 22.2% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.5% | 10.8% | 12.0% | better |
‡ 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.
67.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 169 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 91.9% 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 86 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 0.49 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 80% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 28% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| 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 | 67.7%CMS range 56.7–75.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.6%CMS range 9.9–15.2 | 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 | 91.9% | 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 | 90.7% | 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 | 72.1% | 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 | 67.6% | 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 | 96.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.9% | 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 | 0.9% | 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 | 6.8%CMS range 4.5–11.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.91 | 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 87 beds and averages 84.8 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.41 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.95 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 2.81 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.77 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.24 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 57% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-25 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident diagnosed with bipolar disorder received mental health services to attain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for behavioral health services. (Resident B) Findings include:During an interview, on [DATE] at 8:47 a.m. Resident B indicated she thought she had refused a medication for insomnia and had been sent to the hospital because she didn't care if she died.The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed, on [DATE] at 9:03 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, bipolar disorder, morbid obesity, and diabetes.A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated [DATE], indicated Resident B was not cognitively impaired.The physician's orders indicated:- Started, on [DATE] and discontinued, on [DATE], indicated administer trazodone (antidepressant used to treat insomnia) 50 milligrams (mg) tablet orally once daily at bedtime for insomnia.The Medication Administration Record…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-25 · 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 ensure documentation on the Medication Administration Record was complete and accurate for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for documentation. (Resident B) Findings include:The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed, on 3/24/26 at 9:03 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, bipolar disorder, morbid obesity, and diabetes.The physician's orders indicated:- Started on 9/12/25, administer amlodipine 10 milligrams (mg) tablet orally once daily for hypertension. There was no discontinue date noted.- Started, on 9/12/25, and discontinued, on 3/9/26, administer aspirin 81mg tablet orally once daily for heart failure.- Started, on 1/6/26, administer buspirone 15mg tablet orally three times daily for anxiety. There was no discontinue date noted.- Started, on 2/3/26, administer cholecalciferol 125 microgram (mcg) tablet once daily for vitamin D deficiency. There was no stop date noted.- Started, on 2/3/26, and discontinued, on 3/2/26, administer divalproex 250mg orally twice daily for bipolar disorder.- Started, on 9/12/25,…
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 · D2025-07-30 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assured the accurate receiving and dispensing of drugs) to meet the needs of residents for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for pharmacy services (Resident B and Resident C).Findings include:During an interview on 7/29/25 at 11:45 a.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated Resident B was erroneously discharged home with Resident C's Novalog (insulin) pen and the nurse should have verified the name on the medication. During an interview on 7/29/25 at 2:48 p.m., LPN 1 indicated she was the nurse who discharged the Resident B home. She removed the insulin pens which were labeled with the resident's identification sticker on the outside of the bag, and she did not check the labels on the medication itself. She indicated she should have checked inside of the bags for the labels on the actual insulin pens. On 7/29/25 at 12:13 p.m., Resident B's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to diabetes mellitus and dependence on renal dialysis.A…
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 · D2025-06-19 · 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 ensure self-medication administration assessments were completed for 2 of 2 residents observed with medications left at the bedside. (Resident 52 and Resident 60) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 6/10/25 at 12:06 p.m., Resident 52 was observed in her room while sitting in her wheelchair next to the bedside table. On top of the bedside table was a small clear plastic medicine cup which held three large white tablets with S9 imprinted on the tablets. No staff were visible in the area at that time. During an interview at that time, Resident 52 indicated the tablets were her binder pills that she takes prior to eating her meals. Resident 52 indicated staff provided the medication to her a little while ago so she could self-administer the medication just before eating her lunch. During an observation on 6/10/25 at 12:45 p.m., Resident 52 was observed in her room while sitting in her wheelchair and visiting with her visitor. No staff were visible in the area at that time. On top of the bedside table was a…
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 · D2025-06-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement infection control practices for 1 of 4 residents observed with an indwelling urinary catheter. The urinary catheter drainage bag was on the floor. (Resident 121) Finding includes: On 6/10/25 at 8:57 a.m., Resident 121 was observed to be in bed with a staff member assisting Resident with the morning meal. Resident 121's urinary catheter drainage bag was observed to be lying on the floor next to the bed. On 6/10/25 at 9:22 a.m., Resident 121's urinary catheter drainage bag was observed to be lying on the floor. On 6/10/25 at 10:30 a.m., Resident 121's urinary catheter drainage bag was observed to be lying on the floor. During an interview on 6/10/25 at 10:35 a.m., the Director of Nursing indicated that the urinary catheter drainage bag should not be lying on the floor. On 6/10/25 at 1:02 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) provided the facility policy, Catheter Care, Urinary, with a revision date of December 2007, and indicated it was the policy currently being used by the facility. A review of 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 · D2025-02-24 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure prescription injectable medication was secured for 1 of 1 random observations. (Resident B) Findings include: On 2/24/25 at 8:16 a.m., two sealed enoxaparin sodium (prescription blood thinner injection) 30 milligrams (mg) per 0.3 milliliter (ml) injections were observed lying on a shelf in Resident B's closet. During an interview on 2/24/25 at 8:27 a.m., LPN 1 indicated the enoxaparin 30 mg/0.3 ml injections should have been locked in the medication cart and not left in Resident B's closet. On 2/24/25 at 11:48 a.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) provided a copy of an undated facility policy, titled Drug Storage, and indicated this was the current policy used by the facility. A review of the policy indicated medications are stored in a medication cart or other secured area. This citation relates to Complaint IN00453284. 3.1-25(m)
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services for a resident admitted with a pressure ulcer for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Treatments were not completed as ordered and care plans were not developed. (Resident B) Findings include: During an interview on 10/10/24 at 10:14 a.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 indicated she would have checked the physician's orders for treatment orders, special repositioning instructions, and medications for wound care. If a wound treatment was not signed off as completed on the electronic medical record (EMR), then the wound treatment was not completed. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 10/10/24 at 1:28 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, physical debility, diabetes, and malnutrition. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 8/22/24, indicated Resident B was admitted with one unhealed stage 1 pressure ulcer (a reddened area of skin that does not change color when palpated). Hospital discharge orders, dated 8/16/24, indicated apply barrier…
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 · D2024-07-16 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure care and services for residents with dialysis were provided for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for dialysis services. Daily weights as ordered by the physician, related to the resident's dialysis services, were not obtained and monitored. (Resident 54, Resident 59, Resident 67) Findings include: 1. On 7/9/24 at 2:41 p.m., Resident 54's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, dependence on renal dialysis (process by which dissolved substances are removed from an individual's body by diffusion from one fluid compartment to another across a semipermeable membrane) and stage 5 chronic kidney disease (also known as end-stage kidney disease where the kidneys are severely damaged and can no longer perform their functions). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/24/24, indicated Resident 54 was cognitively intact and renal failure, End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD), stage 5 chronic renal failure, and was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-01 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an effective pest control program was maintained and the facility was free of rodents affecting 5 of 8 residents reviewed. (Resident D, Resident E, Resident J, Resident K, Resident M) Findings include: During the initial tour, on 4/1/24 from 9:26 a.m. to 9:50 a.m., Housekeeping (HSK) 2 indicated there were issues with mice in several resident rooms. The Maintenance Department Director was notified of the mice. The following was observed during the facility tour: 1. room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed to have one resident who resided in the room. The following was observed: - Resident J had a dresser with multiple drawers near the entry door and approximately 6 feet from the resident's bed. Inside the bottom drawer were multiple folded towels and wash cloths. Visible on the towels and wash cloths were multiple small black rice-like substances. 2. room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed to have two residents who resided in the room. 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 · Ecited before2023-06-07 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to inventory and document resident belongings upon admission and discharge for 4 of 4 residents reviewed. (Resident B, Resident C, Resident D, Resident E) Findings include: 1. On 5/30/23 at 12:30 p.m., Resident B's clinical record was reviewed. Resident B admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 2/8/23. An inventory sheet was not completed in Resident B's clinical record. 2. On 6/2/23 at 11:30 a.m., Resident C's clinical record was reviewed. Resident C admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 4/2/23. An inventory sheet was not completed in Resident C's clinical record. 3. On 6/2/23 at 11:45 a.m., Resident D's clinical record was reviewed. Resident D admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 3/26/23. An inventory sheet was not completed in Resident D's clinical record. 4. On 6/2/23 at 12:00 p.m., Resident E's clinical record was reviewed. Resident E admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 2/17/23. 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-07 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders for skin treatment services were accurately provided and recorded for 2 of 7 residents reviewed. (Resident 174, Resident 25) Findings include: 1. During an interview on 5/30/23 at 1:57 p.m., Resident 174 indicated he was admitted to the facility with a sore spot on his right outer ankle area and that staff treat the area every Tuesday and Thursday. On 6/2/23 at 10:00 a.m., Resident 174's clinical record was reviewed. Resident 174 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, disorder of the skin and diabetes. The admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 4/18/23, indicated Resident 174 was cognitively intact and was receiving applications of ointment/medications for skin conditions. Resident 174's care plan included, but was not limited to, Problem: Resident has skin breakdown to outer ankle; start date: 4/12/23; Goal: Area will resolve without complication;…
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 CARDON & ASSOCIATES — 19 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 3.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 3.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.5 | -1.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
The other 18 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.7★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RIVERVIEW HOSPITAL | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 12/01/2011 |
| ORIX REAL ESTATE CAPITAL LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/17/2025 |
| BAAH, DEBRAH | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/11/2024 |
| BALLA, MATTHEW | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/23/2022 |
| CATTELL, ZACHARY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/25/2021 |
| FAUTH, KENDRA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/26/2021 |
| GORMAL, GREGG | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2016 |
| HAUG, AMY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/04/2022 |
| LOPOSSA, LYNN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/17/2023 |
| MCCLELLAND, THOMAS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/26/2021 |
| SPENCER, LEAANN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/18/2018 |
| TYLER, LATEASA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2021 |
| FRIEND, JAYNA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2021 |
| HYATT, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 03/27/2023 |
| CARDON AND ASSOCIATES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/17/2025 |
| CARDON MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/18/2025 |
| MOORE OPERATING GROUP INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/18/2020 |
| DEVNEY, TERESA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/18/2022 |
| HAFIDH, SAAD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/07/2020 |
| INGRAM, STEPHANIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/01/2021 |
| MCINTOSH, ERIC | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/31/2021 |
| ALTENHEIM H&L PROPERTY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2011 |
| ANKURA CONSULTING GROUP LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/15/2022 |
| BRADLEY & ASSOCIATES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2023 |
| COLE MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2015 |
| FORVIS MAZARS LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2011 |
| HEALTHDRIVE PODIATRY GROUP PA | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/07/2019 |
| HEART OF CARDON LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/06/2007 |
| JEFFREY L MORER OD PC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/07/2019 |
| LACY BEYL & COMPANY INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/15/2015 |
| LIFESPAN THERAPY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/25/2007 |
| MED-PASS INCORPORATED | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/01/2020 |
| MOBILE AUDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES PC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/07/2019 |
| MOSER CONSULTING INCORPORATED | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2020 |
| PROACTIVE CLINICAL PARTNERS | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2020 |
| RESPIRATORY PARTNERS INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2019 |
| THIRD EYE HEALTH INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/04/2022 |
| TOTAL RENAL LABORATORIES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/16/2021 |
| VOX GLOBAL LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/28/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 67 rows in the source record cover these 39 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
23 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $4.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 30% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in IN
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 155196. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-19, 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.