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

Chalet Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center

4851 Tincher Rd, Indianapolis, IN 46221 · For profit - Corporation · 88 certified beds · (317) 856-4851 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (317) 856-4851 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Mar 20261 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)
Insights

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

In its favor
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2026
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • 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
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (62%) runs well above the national median (45%)
  • about 20% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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

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

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

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

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
3455 Mann Rd · (317) 487-0722 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
4837 Kentucky Avenue · (317) 830-4259 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Walmart0.6 mi
4837 Kentucky Ave · (317) 830-4950 · Call to confirm hours
Park
4620 S High School Rd · (317) 856-4838 · 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 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 2 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 rating2★
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 increased1.4%11.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.5%5.5%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.4%0.9%better than 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 symptoms37.1%25.2%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.4%3.9%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened3.1%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.3%23.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine30.6%95.4%95.3%worse
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.5%3.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control20.4%23.3%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.8%13.6%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.3%1.2%1.4%typical
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine1.3%79.0%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission36.3%22.2%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit15.1%10.8%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.101.611.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.921.441.80typical

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.

55.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.51U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.19hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.26hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 55.2% 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 29 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 0.51 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 82% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a 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 SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge55.2%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 discharge55.2%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 discharge37.9%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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in 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 SNFs1.551.02Oct 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

0.57
RN hours/ resident / day
1.03
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.95
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.55
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.34
RN hoursweekends
61.8%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 88 beds and averages 67.2 residents a day — about 76% occupied, or roughly 21 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.57 is at or above 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 3.10 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.74 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 62% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-06-05)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2025-04-03)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Actual harm · G2026-02-16 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's person-centered fall prevention care plan interventions were implemented for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for falls. This deficient practice resulted in a resident sustaining a fracture to her left tibia and fibula. (Resident B) Findings include:During an interview on 2/13/26 at 9:52 a.m., Resident B indicated she had a fall from bed when CNA 1 stood on the left side of the bed and rolled Resident B to her right side. Resident B's left leg slid forward, and she fell from the bed. Resident B fractured her left tibia and fibula. There was only one staff member in her room when she fell.The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 2/8/26 at 1:53 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, cerebral infarct and hemiplegia affecting left nondominant side.A care plan, dated 10/1/25, indicated Resident B had a self-care deficit related to weakness, limited mobility, and impaired balance. The interventions included, but were not limited to, two staff assist with bed mobility.A Quarterly Minimum Data…

    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 · Fcited before2026-06-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure foods were served in a sanitary and safe manner for 1 of 3 kitchen observations. Staff hair was not covered while in the kitchen food preparation area and while serving the meal. (Cook 4) Finding includes: During a follow-up kitchen observation on 6/1/26 from 12:20 p.m. to 12:40 p.m., [NAME] 4 was observed working at the food preparation table located on the opposite side of the steam table that held the noon foods. [NAME] 4 was observed preparing the resident's food trays. [NAME] 4 was observed to have facial hair, approximately one-half inch in length, located above the upper lips and sideburns located in front of both ears. The facial hair above the lips and the sideburns were observed to not be covered. During an interview on 6/1/26 at 1:20 p.m., the Dietary Manager indicated staff hair, including facial hair, was to be kept covered while in the kitchen. On 6/1/26 at 1:46 p.m., the Dietary Manager provided an undated copy of the Personal Hygiene and Health Reporting policy and indicated it was 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-06-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were implemented for residents requiring Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for EBP. Gowns were not worn during direct resident care. (Resident 74, CNA 2, and CNA 3)Finding includes: On 6/1/26 at 10:10 a.m., a sign was observed on Resident 74's door indicating EBP (gown and gloves) were required for direct resident care. CNA 2 and CNA 3 were observed to be providing care to Resident 74. CNA 2 and CNA 3 were observed to be wearing only gloves. CNA 2 was observed cleansing Resident 74's groin area with a washcloth. At that time, CNA 3 had begun to don a gown. CNA 2 stopped providing direct care to Resident 74 donned a gown. During an interview at that time CNA 2 and CNA 3 indicated that a gown should have been donned prior to providing direct care to Resident 74. During an interview on 6/1/26 at 12:03 p.m., the Director of Nursing indicated that staff should wear EBP (gowns and gloves) when providing direct care to a resident that required EBP. On…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-05 · 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 a resident's rights to be free from verbal and mental abuse by the Administrator for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. (Administrator, Resident B)Finding includes:On 3/5/26 at 9:15 a.m., the clinical record for Resident B was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, bipolar disorder (a chronic mental health condition characterized by intense mood swings to extreme highs to severe lows) and PTSD (Post-traumatic stress disorder; a chronic mental health condition triggered by experiencing or witnessing terrifying events, causing symptoms such as nightmare, flashback, severe anxiety, and avoidance of triggers lasting over a month).The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/15/26, indicated Resident B was cognitively intact.On 3/5/26 at 9:00 a.m., a facility reportable incident report was reviewed. The report was submitted to the Indiana Department of Health on 2/26/26 and a follow-up report was submitted on 2/27/26. The report indicated that on 2/19/26 the facility Administrator 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an incident of alleged staff to resident verbal and mental abuse was immediately reported to facility management, as indicated by facility policy, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for reporting resident abuse. (Resident B, Administrator, Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing, Staffing Coordinator, and Housekeeping Supervisor) Finding includes: On 3/5/26 at 9:00 a.m., facility reportable incident report was reviewed. The report was submitted to the Indiana Department of Health on 2/26/26, a follow-up report was submitted on 2/27/26, and a new update was submitted on 3/4/26. The report indicated that on 2/19/26 the facility Administrator was involved in verbal altercations against Resident B. The report indicated the Administrator's behaviors displayed against Resident B on 2/19/26 .violated the resident's rights and met the definition of abuse. Additionally, the Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), Staffing Coordinator, and Housekeeping Supervisor witnessed the Administrator's…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-16 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's tube gastrostomy tube feeding was labelled for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for tube feeding. (Resident C) Findings include:On 2/13/26 at 12:21 p.m., Resident C was observed lying in bed. There was a tab-colored tube running from under Resident C's sheet up to a tube feeding pump at the side of the bed. The feeding pump was set to administer 60 milliliters (ml) of feeding per hour with a 40 ml water flush every hour. The feeding bag lacked a label that indicated the type of feeding, the rate of the feeding, the date and time the feeding was hung/administered, and the nurse's initials. At that time, LPN 2 indicated the feeding bag should have been labeled when the nurse hung it. The clinical record for Resident C was reviewed on 2/16/26 at 8:39 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, traumatic brain injury, aphasia, dysphagia, and gastrotomy.A current physician's order, initiated 12/29/25, indicated Glucerna 1.5 at 60 ml per hour with 40 ml free water flush every hour.On 2/16/26…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-07 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was developed for a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for urinary catheters. (Resident C) Finding includes:On 1/6/26 at 11:20 a.m., observed Resident C to have an indwelling urinary catheter. At that time, Resident C indicated the staff had taken good care of his urinary catheter since it had been placed. The clinical record for Resident C was reviewed on 1/7/26 at 9:43 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, obstructive uropathy and benign prostatic hyperplasia. A current physician's order, initiated on 8/7/25, indicated Resident C had an indwelling urinary catheter. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/15/25, indicated Resident C was moderately cognitively impaired and had an indwelling urinary catheter. The clinical record for Resident C lacked a comprehensive care plan for Resident C's indwelling urinary catheter. On 1/7/26 at 11:58 a.m., the Director of Nursing provided a copy of a facility 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0694 — isolated
    Provide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
    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's with a peripherally inserted central line (PICC) (a small tube inserted into a vein in the upper arm that extends to the top of the heart used to administer intravenous fluid/medications) was dated and initialed for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for quality of intravenous (IV) care. (Resident D) Finding includes:On 1/6/26 at 10:28 a.m., observed Resident D to have an IV (a small catheter inserted into the vein) in the right upper arm. The IV dressing was not dated or initialed. At that time, Resident D indicated he had been receiving antibiotics through his PICC (peripherally inserted central catheter) line. The clinical record for Resident D was reviewed on 1/6/26 at 2:08 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, acute hematogenous osteomyelitis, peripheral vascular disease, and diabetes. A current physician's order, initiated on 1/3/26, indicated to change PICC line dressing every seven days and as needed. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/31/25, indicated…

    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 · D2026-01-07 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard 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 was complete for 2 of 3 residents reviewed. The Treatment Administration Record was incomplete. (Resident B, Resident C) Finding includes:1. On 1/6/26 at 11:20 a.m., observed Resident C to have an indwelling urinary catheter. At that time, Resident C indicated the staff had taken good care of his urinary catheter since it had been placed.The clinical record for Resident C was reviewed on 1/7/26 at 9:43 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, obstructive uropathy and benign prostatic hyperplasia.A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/15/25, indicated Resident C was moderately cognitively impaired and had an indwelling urinary catheter.The physician's orders included, but were not limited to: - Ensure catheter bag is covered, maintain urinary drainage bag below the bladder, keep tubing and bag from touching the floor, and empty bag every shift, initiated on 8/7/25. - Provide catheter care every shift, initiated on 8/7/25. The December 2025 TAR, dated 12/1/25 at 12:00 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 · D2025-04-03 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure reasonable accommodation of needs for 1 of 18 residents observed for call light access. (Resident 52) Finding includes: On 3/30/25 at 8:36 a.m., Resident 52 was observed sitting up in his wheelchair in his room. The touch pad call light was observed to be wrapped around and clipped to the plug in cord at the foot of the bed between Resident 52's bed and the wall, out of reach of Resident 52. On 3/31/25 at 9:12 a.m., Resident 52 was observed in bed with the touch pad call light wrapped up and attached with a clip to the plug in cord at the foot of bed between the bed and the wall, out of reach of Resident 52. During an interview at that time, Resident 52 indicated he was unable to reach the call light. During an interview on 3/31/25 at 9:20 a.m., RN 2 indicated that the call light was not in within Resident 52's reach. During an interview on 3/31/25 at 9:23 a.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated that Resident 52 could not reach his call light. During an observation on 4/2/25 at 9:02 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-03 · 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) assessment was correctly coded to reflect the hospice election status for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hospice. (Resident 44) Finding includes: On 4/2/25 at 11:41 a.m., the clinical record of Resident 44 was reviewed. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, acute kidney failure. A physician's order, dated 8/8/24, indicated Resident 44 was admitted hospice. An annual MDS assessment, dated 1/16/25, indicated Resident 44 was not receiving hospice services. During an interview on 4/2/25 at 10:57 a.m., the MDS Coordinator indicated Resident 44 had been receiving hospice services for a long time and indicated MDS assessment should have been updated. During an interview on 4/2/25 at 11:02 a.m., the Executive Director indicated the facility followed the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) manual regarding MDS assessment accuracy. On 4/2/25 at 12:01 p.m., the Executive Director provided a copy of the CMS RAI Version 3.0 Manual (Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Resident Assessment…

    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 · Dcited before2025-04-03 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a person-centered comprehensive care plan was accurately developed or implemented for residents' advanced directives, for 3 of 18 residents reviewed for advanced directive preferences. (Resident 23, Resident 29, Resident 281) Finding includes: 1. On [DATE] at 10:45 a.m., Resident 23's clinical record was reviewed. Resident 23's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder and chronic pancreatitis. A physician's order, dated [DATE] and with no end date, indicated that Resident 23 had an advanced directive, or code status, of do not resuscitate or DNR (a medical order that instructs medical professionals not to attempt CPR if a patient's heart stops beating or breathing; this allows the patient to die naturally). A POST (Indiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment) form, prepared [DATE], indicated Resident 23 had selected do not attempt resuscitation/DNR. The form was signed by the resident. The care plan…

    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 · D2025-04-03 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an advanced directive care plan was updated when the resident's code status preference was changed for 1 of 18 residents reviewed. (Resident 7) Finding includes: On [DATE] at 9:55 a.m., Resident 7's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Current Physician orders, dated [DATE], included, but was not limited to, Code Status: CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation), start date [DATE] with no end date noted. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated [DATE], indicated Resident 7 was cognitively intact. Resident 7's care plan included, but was not limited to, .[Resident 7] has an established advanced directive of POST [Indiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment] form indicating DNR [do not attempt resuscitation/do not resuscitate] code status. The care plan was initiated on [DATE] and was considered current through [DATE]. On [DATE] at 12:55 p.m., the Executive…

    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 · Dcited before2024-01-04 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure staff reported an allegation of physical abuse immediately for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident B) Finding includes: During an interview on 1/3/24 at 1:27 p.m., the Administrator indicated on 12/30/23, an allegation was made that LPN 1 (Licensed Practical Nurse) witnessed LPN 2 and QMA 1 (Qualified Medication Aide) abruptly put Resident B in bed. Once Resident B was in bed, he sat up and LPN 2 kicked Resident B. It was alleged this took place a couple weeks ago but unfortunately it was not reported until 12/30/23. During an interview on 1/4/24 at 9:50 a.m., LPN 1 indicated approximately 2 to 3 weeks ago, on evening shift after 7:00 p.m., Resident B was on the floor, on his knees, at the foot of his bed. He had a small can in his hand that LPN 1 thought was shaving cream. LPN 1 asked LPN 2 and QMA 1 to help get Resident B off the floor and into his bed. LPN 1, LPN 2, and QMA 1 entered Resident B's room to get him up and LPN 2 indicated that Resident B's legs needed to be straightened first. After…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-13 · 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 stored in a sanitary manner for 1 of 1 kitchen observations. Food was not dated. Finding includes: During the initial tour of the kitchen on 9/13/23 from 9:01 a.m. until 9:40 a.m., the freezer and refrigerator were observed. Inside the freezer the following was observed: - A large clear plastic opened bag, undated, that contained 1 chicken breast that was observed to be covered with small ice crystals. - A large clear plastic opened bag, undated, that contained green vegetables that was observed to have small ice crystals throughout the bag. Inside the refrigerator the following was observed: - An opened, undated, glass 32 ounce container. The glass container was half full of great value pickles with a use by date of 6/18/23. - An opened, undated, clear plastic 30 ounce container. The plastic container was half full of mayonnaise. - An opened, undated, clear plastic gallon container. The gallon container was 3/4 full of unsweet tea with a best by date of 2/18/23. - An opened, undated, clear…

    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

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CASTLE HEALTHCARE — 7 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 2 of 53.0-1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.6-0.6 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 51.6+0.4 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.7-0.7 vs chain
The other 6 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
DECATUR REAL PROPCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2021
BORNE-BAUMAN, CANDICEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2019
FLUECKIGER, RUSSELLIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2015
LEHMAN, SCOTTIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/14/2020
MACKLIN, LARRYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2013
MCINTIRE, DAVIDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2019
ADAMS COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITALOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2013
CLAYSHIRE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
DECATUR REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2021
FORVIS MAZARS LLPOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
LT CARE ACQUISITION CORPOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2021
ANDRES, ANTHONYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
BERDUGO, SHAIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
HUGHES, EDWARDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/17/2022
SMITH, SCOTTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2020
SPRUNGER, KYLEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2018
WHEELER, DANEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2013
DAVIS, NESANELIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/29/2026
NEUMAN, MENASHEIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/29/2026
SINGER, CHAYAIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/29/2026
STRIMBU, TINAIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/29/2026
BLUE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2024
CASTLE INDIANA MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
FIRST BANK OF BERNEOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 37 rows in the source record cover these 24 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

9 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$13.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+25.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.0M
Related-party expense20% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 61%Medicare 7%Other / private 32%

This home reported $2.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

$382per resident / day
operating cost
$11,626per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$513per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in IN

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Indiana Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Indiana
$8,943/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,326/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,639/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 155336. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-05, 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