Westminster Village North
11050 Presbyterian Dr, Indianapolis, IN 46236 · Government - County · 148 certified beds · (317) 823-6841 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- 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
- 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
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — 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)
- 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 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.
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 | 10.2% | 11.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 15.1% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.4% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 1.1% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 6.6% | 25.2% | 6.5% | typical |
| 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 | 5.2% | 3.9% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 17.9% | 11.9% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.7% | 23.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 99.2% | 95.4% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 3.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 28.1% | 23.3% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.5% | 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 | 94.5% | 79.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 29.8% | 22.2% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 21.5% | 10.8% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.23 | 1.61 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.53 | 1.44 | 1.80 | 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.
61.8% 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 182 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 61.5% 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 83 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 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 15% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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 | 61.8%CMS range 55.1–67.8 | 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 | 9.1%CMS range 6.6–12.1 | 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 | 61.5% | 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 | 65.1% | 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 | 51.8% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 98.0% | 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 | 3.2% | 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 | 1.1% | 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 | 5.9%CMS range 3.5–10.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.83 | 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 148 beds and averages 116.6 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 31 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 3.75 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.10 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 3.44 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.88 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
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.
41 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 31 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2025-11-24 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 written discharge and bed hold information was provided directly to the resident and the resident's representative upon transfer for 4 of 5 residents reviewed for hospitalization. (Resident 7, 13, 1 and 4)Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident 7 was reviewed on 11/18/25 at 3:16 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, personality disorder, mild neurocognitive disorder, spinal stenosis, dysphagia, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, congestive heart failure, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. a. A progress note, dated 9/28/25 at 2:31 p.m., indicated Resident 7 was sent to the hospital. It did not indicate the son was notified. A transfer/discharge form, dated 9/28/25, indicated the form was sent with Resident 7. A progress note, dated 9/29/25 at 1:21 p.m., indicated the facility placed a call to the son regarding the bed hold…
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 · D2025-11-24 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 the clinical record did not contain conflicting physician's orders related to code status for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for advanced directives. (Resident 23 and 117)Findings include:1. The clinical record for Resident 23 was reviewed on [DATE] at 2:33 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, paraplegia, lumbar spina bifida with hydrocephalus, and chronic osteomyelitis with draining sinus. An active physician's order, dated [DATE], indicated the resident was a full code. An active physician's order, dated [DATE], indicated the resident's preference was do not resuscitate with limited interventions.The clinical record contained two active physician's orders with conflicting code status. 2. The clinical record for Resident 117 was reviewed on [DATE] at 11:34 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, persistent vegetative state, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and chronic kidney disease.An active physician's order,…
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 · D2025-11-24 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
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 new Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASSAR) level I was completed after antipsychotic medications were initiated for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for PASSAR. (Resident 124 and 28)Findings include:1. The clinical record for Resident 124 was reviewed on 11/19/25 at 1:57 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, anxiety disorder, dementia with psychotic disturbances, and hallucinations.A PASSAR level I, dated 3/27/25, indicated Resident 124 did not require a level II screen because there was no evidence of an intellectual/developmental disability or a serious behavioral health condition. The screening indicated if there was a change in condition or if new information refuted the findings, a new screen must be submitted. The PASSAR level I indicated Resident 124 did not currently or in the past 6 months take any mental health medications.A care plan, dated 4/26/25, indicated Resident 124 used psychotropic medications related to anxiety, restlessness, agitation, hallucinations, and insomnia.A care…
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 · D2025-11-24 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure regularly scheduled care plan meetings were held with the resident or resident's representative and documented in the clinical record for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for care plan conferences. (Resident 23)Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 23 was reviewed on 11/17/25 at 2:33 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, paraplegia, lumbar spina bifida with hydrocephalus, and chronic osteomyelitis with draining sinus.There were no progress notes, documents, or assessments in the clinical record to indicate a care plan meeting had been held with the resident or resident's representative.During an interview, on 11/19/25 at 10:17 a.m., the Social Service Designee indicated she could not find information on a care plan meeting for Resident 23.During an interview, on 11/20/25 at 1:51 p.m., the Social Services Designee indicated she did not have any notes or documentation for a care plan meeting for Resident 23.A current facility policy, titled Care Planning-Resident Participation, dated 6/4/25 and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's preferences were reevaluated to ensure the resident maintained the highest practicable level of mental and social needs for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for activities of daily living care. (Resident 8)Findings include:During an observation and interview, on 11/17/25 at 11:36 a.m., Resident 8 was in her room, wearing a hospital style gown, lying in bed, and watching television. She indicated she had not been out of bed since she was admitted to the facility and indicated if a staff member would ask if she wanted to get up, she would. She relied on assistance from the staff to get up because she could not do it on her own. She received meals in her room and bed baths on her shower days. There was a high back wheelchair in her room and a blue Hoyer pad in the wheelchair. She indicated she was unaware the wheelchair was in the room, as it sat next to a half wall which separated the bedroom and sitting room and was out of her sight.During an observation and interview, on 11/18/25 at 10:11 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician of a weight gain as ordered and to hold a blood pressure medication according to the physician's parameters for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for quality of care. (Resident 2 and 5)Findings include: 1. During an observation, on 11/17/25 at 2:04 p.m., Resident 2 had mild swelling in both ankles. The clinical record for Resident 2 was reviewed on 11/18/25 at 3:14 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, chronic diastolic congestive heart failure, and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. A physician's order, dated 11/19/24, indicated obtain a weight once a day for congestive heart failure and to notify the physician of a weight gain greater than 2 pounds a day. The Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated September 2025, indicated the following: On 9/24/25, the weight was 182.5 pounds.On 9/25/25, the weight was 185.6 pounds (a gain of 3.1 pounds). The MAR, dated October 2025, indicated the following: On 10/8/25, the weight was 177.8…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a gait belt was used during a transfer for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for accidents. (Resident 106)Findings include:During a random observation, on 11/17/25 at 3:11 p.m., Resident 106 was heard screaming no, no in their room. Upon entering the room with the Director of Nursing (DON), CNA 3 was observed behind Resident 106, who was on the floor. CNA 3 was observed wearing a gait belt around her waist. CNA 3 indicated she did not use the gait belt to transfer the resident.The clinical record for Resident 106 was reviewed on 11/21/25 at 12:48 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infraction (weakness and paralysis on one side of the body from a stroke), repeated falls, and vascular dementia.The care plans for Resident 106 did not address using a gait belt for transfers.During an interview, on 11/17/25 at 3:20 p.m., CNA 3 indicated she did not have her resident assignment sheet with her and it was on a table outside of the room. She left the room…
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 · D2025-11-24 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments were accurately documented for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for accurate assessments. (Resident 134)Findings include:During an observation and interview, on 11/17/25 at 11:14 a.m., Resident 134 had a gastrostomy tube (g-tube) with enteral feed (liquid nutrition administered directly into the stomach through the tube) running. Resident 134 indicated he was readmitted to the facility 2 weeks ago after having a feeding tube placed in the hospital. Since he had the feeding tube placed, he had not been able to eat or drink anything by mouth except ice chips.The clinical record for Resident 134 was reviewed on 11/20/25 at 8:34 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, gastrostomy tube (a surgically placed tube inserted through the abdomen directly into the stomach for nutrition), and depression.A hospital document, dated 11/12/25, indicated Resident 134 was discharged back to the facility with a g-tube and was tolerating the enteral feeding at the time…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided to prevent a cognitively impaired resident from leaving a secured memory unit unsupervised for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for dementia care. (Resident B)Findings include: The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 8/18/25 at 11:10 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, vascular dementia and anxiety. She resided on the secured memory care unit. A care plan, last revised on 5/7/25, indicated Resident B had behavior problems related to repetitive movements such as pacing and rummaging, rearranging her room, taking and leaving items in others rooms, wandering, and exit seeking. The goal was for her to have fewer behavioral episodes. The interventions included, but were not limited to, address wandering behavior by walking, redirect from inappropriate areas, engage in diversional activity, be calm and self-assured and anticipate and meet Resident B's needs.An Elopement Evaluation, with an effective date of 7/8/25, indicated she had a history of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-19 · 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 ensure a newly ordered medication was received timely from the facility contracted pharmacy and administered, as ordered by the physician, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident E)Findings include: The clinical record for Resident E was reviewed on 8/18/25 at 11:17 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, congestive heart failure. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 6/9/25, indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. A Skin/Wound Note, dated 7/25/25 at 12:03 p.m., indicated Resident E had swelling present to the left lower extremity and foot. Upon assessment, Resident E's limb had redness with areas that appeared to be blistering. The Nurse Practitioner (NP) was notified and would assess.A physician's order, dated 7/25/25 at 1:16 p.m., indicated Resident E was to receive furosemide (a diuretic medication used to help remove excess fluids from the body) 20 milligrams (mg) given twice a day for edema (swelling) for four days. A Health Status Note, dated 7/26/25 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 31 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-19 · 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 ensure personal protective equipment (PPE) was worn during a wound treatment and to ensure hand hygiene was performed after doffing disposable gloves for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for wound care (Resident E).Findings include: The clinical record for Resident E was reviewed on 8/18/25 at 11:17 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, congestive heart failure. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 6/9/25, indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. A physician's order, dated 8/12/25, indicated to cleanse the area on the top of the right foot with wound cleanser, apply bacitracin to the wound bed, top with xeroform (petroleum gauze), cover with an ABD pad (type of wound dressing), wrap with kerlix (type of wound dressing) and secure with tape. On 8/19/25 at 10:05 a.m., Registered Nurse (RN) 2 was observed providing wound care to Resident E. RN 2 donned disposable gloves and removed the old dressing from Resident E's right foot. RN 2 went to the bathroom and removed her disposable…
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 · D2024-12-16 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accuracy for behaviors for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for behavior management. (Resident B) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 12/16/24 at 11:00 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, senile degeneration of the brain, dementia with agitation, dementia with psychotic disturbance, and anxiety disorder. A Significant Change MDS assessment, dated 9/30/24, indicated Resident B exhibited no behaviors. Upon review of the progress notes, the following date(s) were indicative of Resident B exhibiting behaviors: 9/22/24, 9/23/24, 9/24/24, 9/25/24, 9/27/24, 9/28/24, & 9/29/24. An interview conducted with the MDS Coordinator, on 12/16/24 at 1:28 p.m., indicated Social Services was responsible for completing the MDS section regarding behaviors.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-16 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with dementia and behaviors was care planned for behaviors along with resident specific interventions on approach to care, ensure visits were conducted of a mental health provider, and document approaches to care when Resident B exhibited behaviors for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for behavior management. Findings include: The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 12/16/24 at 11:00 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, senile degeneration of the brain, dementia with agitation, dementia with psychotic disturbance, and anxiety disorder. An admission MDS assessment, dated 5/24/24, indicated severe cognitive impairment, physical behaviors directed towards others occurred one to three days, significant risk for injury and interference with care regarding behaviors, and rejection of care every four to six days. A psychiatric visit form, dated 6/27/24, indicated Resident B had multiple behaviors including refusing medications and being combative with care. Treatment goals were for Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-16 · 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 ensure a narcotic pain medication was administered per the physician orders for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pain management. (Resident B) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 12/16/24 at 11:00 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, senile degeneration of the brain, dementia with agitation, dementia with psychotic disturbance, and anxiety disorder. A physician order, dated 10/20/24, indicated a fentanyl patch (narcotic pain-relieving patch) 12 mcg (micrograms) was to be applied every three days. This order ended on 11/19/24. A hospice note, dated 11/6/24, indicated an order to increase Resident B's fentanyl patch from 12 mcg to 25 mcg and change the patch every three days. A physician order, dated 11/7/24, indicated to apply a 25 mcg fentanyl patch to Resident B every three days. A controlled drug use record form for Resident B's 25 mcg fentanyl patch indicated one was administered on 11/10/24. A controlled drug use record form for Resident B's 12 mcg fentanyl patch 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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-18 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to assure residents were treated with dignity and respect for 3 of 9 residents interviewed during Resident Council and 2 of 2 residents reviewed for dignity. (Resident B, P, 52, N, and K) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident N was reviewed on 7/11/24 at 10:04 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, unspecified injury of the cervical spinal cord and diabetes. A Significant Change of Status MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 4/8/24, indicated she was cognitively intact. During an interview for Resident Council, on 7/11/24 at 2:30 p.m., Resident N indicated the CNAs (Certified Nurse Aides) would come into her room and turn the call light off, telling her they would be back in a minute, but they never came back. When the staff does not assist with her needs, when her call light was on, she felt neglected and uncared for. She was to the point where she just lets it roll. 2. The clinical record for Resident P was reviewed on 7/10/24 at 10:49 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-18 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
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 promptly act on a resident council grievance about tablecloths in the dining room. This had the potential to affect 9 of 123 residents who attend resident council. Findings include: On 7/11/24 at 1:24 p.m., the ADM (Administrator) provided the resident council minutes for April, May, and June 2024. The Resident Council Minutes, dated April 11, 2024, indicated that Resident 52 did not like the tablecloths removed from the dining rooms and the Administrator (ADM) had encouraged her to give the changes of the dining room experience a chance. A Resident Council meeting was held on 7/11/24 at 2:30 p.m. There were 9 residents in attendance. The council indicated the facility had stopped utilizing tablecloths in the health center dining rooms. The assisted living and the independent living dining rooms had tablecloths. The council had expressed concerns about not utilizing tablecloths in resident council meetings. They had not received any follow-up on the grievance of not having tablecloths, other than the new…
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 · E2024-07-18 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to timely address resident grievances, provide dates that grievances were resolved, provide dates that follow up was done with the individual who brought forward the grievance, indicate that grievances were confirmed or not confirmed, and to provide a means for residents to file a grievance anonymously for 7 of 7 grievances reviewed. (Residents N, P, and R) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident N was reviewed on 7/11/24 at 10:04 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, unspecified injury of the cervical spinal cord and diabetes. A Significant Change of Status MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 4/8/24, indicated she was cognitively intact. A care plan, last revised on 4/23/24, indicated Resident N had a potential for alteration in mood related to depression, flat affect, reports little interest in doing things, tearful episodes, and critical of staff and routine. The goal was for her to demonstrate an improved mood. The interventions included, but were not limited to, encourage and allow open…
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 before2024-07-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure incident reports were completed after each fall event, post fall assessments were completed on every shift (morning, evening, and night) for 72 hours, and fall interventions were in place for 5 of 8 residents reviewed for accidents. (Residents E, C, F, M, and D) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident E was reviewed on 7/12/24 at 10:30 a.m. The diagnoses included, but was not limited to, dementia and a displaced comminuted (broken in at least two places) fracture of the right femur. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/4/24, indicated Resident E required substantial/maximal assistance with transfers to and from bed/chair, toileting, and moving from a sit to stand/stand to sit position. Resident E was not cognitively intact. 1a. A nursing note, dated 12/24/23 at 12:23 p.m., indicated Resident E's Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) had observed Resident E walking back from her bathroom and witnessed her fall in the bedroom. Resident E complained of a headache and left leg…
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 · E2024-07-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a clean, sanitized, and well maintained kitchen by staff who failed to wear beard restraints to prevent hair from contacting food, ensure proper storage of food products by keeping track of when to discard perishable foods stored in the refrigerator, maintain a minimum washing temperature in 1 of 2 dishwashers in the facility, and failed to sanitize rolling kitchen carts before placing them in the storage room in kitchen 1 of 2 where food products are stored with the potential to affect 97 of 123 residents who receive food from the kitchen. (Facility) Findings include: 1. An observation of the facility kitchens 1 and 2 was conducted, on 7/10/24 at 10:20 a.m., with the Kitchen Manager (KM 2) and the Dining Service Director (DSD). An observation was conducted of kitchen 1, on 7/10/24 at 10:20 a.m., of the walk-in refrigerator. There was an open box containing individual Jello cups with the expiration date, of 6/29/24, and an open box…
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 · E2024-07-18 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that it remained free of flying insects in a food storage area within 1 of 2 kitchens potentially affecting 97 out of 123 residents. (Facility) Findings include: A tour of kitchen 1 was conducted, on 7/10/24 10:20 a.m., with Kitchen Manager (KM 2) and Dining Service Director (DSD). Tiny flying insects, resembling gnats, were observed flying around in the air and on products in storage area. There were several seen and observation reflected a count of 9 seen in immediate area. An interview was conducted with KM 2 on 7/10/24 at 10:33 a.m. She indicated that there should not be any flying insects in the kitchen or storage area. 3.1-19(f)(4)
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-18 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to timely provide a resident with a wheelchair that accommodated his height for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for positioning. (Resident D) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident D was reviewed on 7/10/24 at 2:20 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, left sided hemiplegia (paralysis of left side) and dependence on wheelchair. He was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A care plan, dated 5/9/24, indicated Resident D had a potential for falls related to a history of traumatic brain injury, immobility, non-ambulatory, and abnormal posture due to hemiplegia (unilateral paralysis) affecting his left dominant side. The goal was for him to be free of falls. An admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 5/14/24, indicated Resident D was cognitively intact and used a wheelchair for mobility. On 7/10/24 at 2:20 p.m., Resident D was observed in his room sitting in his wheelchair. He would lean back in the wheelchair with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-18 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify a resident's representative of a fall event for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident F) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident F was reviewed on 7/10/24 at 2:00 p.m. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, Alzheimer's disease. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/13/24, indicated Resident F was cognitively impaired. A care plan, dated 6/10/24, indicated Resident F had a potential for falls r/t [related to] deconditioning gait/balance problems, unaware of safety needs. fall in the home, down unknown length of time, seen in ER [emergency room] and admit to hospital. Fall in facility impulsive. no injuries . During a Confidential Interview, they indicated Resident F's Representative was not notified the resident had more than one fall at the facility. A nursing progress note for Resident F, dated 6/21/24, indicated the following, .Resident was on the floor in Aspen activity room. She said she got up from her wheel chair and sat on the floor. She denied falling. She…
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 · D2024-07-18 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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 that all alleged violations involving abuse or neglect were timely reported to IDOH (Indiana Department of Health) for 1 of 2 residents investigated for dignity. (Resident N) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident N was reviewed on 7/11/24 at 10:04 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, unspecified injury of the cervical spinal cord and diabetes. A Significant Change of Status MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 4/8/24, indicated she was cognitively intact. On 7/12/24 at 2:05 p.m., the SSD (Social Services Director) provided Investigation and Follow-up of Grievance/ Complaint forms for Resident N dated 5/21/24. The Follow-up of Grievance/ Complaint form, dated 5/21/24, indicated the following, .Detailed description of complaint: NOC [night] 5/21/24 Res [resident] had complaint related to customer service issues. Department Involved: Nursing. Corrective Measures: Initiated in-service R/T [related to] resident's concern-proper transfers, following CNA [certified nurse aide] assignment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-18 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 3. The clinical record for Resident F was reviewed on 7/10/24 at 2:00 p.m. The resident's diagnosis included, but was not limited to, Alzheimer's disease. The resident was admitted on [DATE]. An admission MDS assessment, dated 6/13/24, indicated Resident F was cognitively impaired. A hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], indicated Resident F was referred for a neurology consultation. The summary provided the neurology contact information. A care plan meeting summary for Resident F, dated 6/10/24, indicated the resident's representatives had requested a neurology consultation, since it had been discussed in the hospital prior to discharge. The resident's clinical record did not include documentation date and time of the neurology consultation nor arrangement of transportation to the appointment. During a Confidential Interview, they indicated Resident F was to be seen by neurology, and the facility had not made arrangements to be seen nor transportation. The facility staff had told Resident F's Representative…
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 · D2024-07-18 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was on continuous oxygen therapy had a physician's order for the oxygen in the electronic health record (EHR) and was provided the necessary care and services by not changing the humidification container as per policy for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Resident C) Findings include: An observation of Resident C's oxygen humidification container was conducted on 7/11/24 at 10:03 a.m. The humidification container was dated, 6/1/24, and the water that was left in the container was cloudy. During the observation, Resident C was wearing her nasal cannula and was receiving humidified oxygen from that container however the water in the humidifier container was not bubbling. A review of Resident C's clinical record conducted, on 7/16/24 at 1:49 p.m., indicated Resident C's diagnoses included, but was not limited to, congestive heart failure, dementia, chronic bronchitis, and anxiety disorder. A review of Resident C's hospice binder was conducted on 7/17/24 at 3:09 p.m. 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 · Dcited before2024-07-18 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
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 administer a pain-relieving patch as ordered for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for pain. (Resident K) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident K was reviewed on 7/10/24 at 11:00 a.m. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, low back pain. A care plan for pain, dated 7/11/24, indicated Resident K was to receive medications as ordered. A physician order, initiated on 7/5/24 and implemented on 7/9/24, indicated the resident was to receive an Aspercreme lidocaine patch for her lower back. The patch was to be applied for 12 hours and removed after 12 hours. The Treatment Administration Record (TAR), dated July 2024, indicated the lidocaine patch was to be applied at 8:00 a.m., and removed at 8:00 p.m. The TAR was documented by the staff the patch was applied, as ordered, from 7/9/24 through 7/17/24. The staff documented the removal of the lidocaine patch, as ordered, from 7/9/24 through 7/16/24. An interview was conducted with Resident K and Resident K's Representative on 7/10/24 at 11:58 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-18 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure pre and post assessments were conducted to a resident receiving dialysis for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for dialysis. (Resident 176) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 176 was reviewed on 7/10/24 at 3:00 p.m. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, chronic kidney disease. The resident's admission date was 7/5/24. A care plan for Resident 176, dated 7/8/24, indicated the resident needs hemodialysis r/t [related to] renal failure. A physician order, dated 7/10/24, indicated Resident 176 was to receive dialysis every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The residents clinical record did not include pre or post assessments on the following dialysis days: 7/12/24 - Friday, and 7/15/24 - Monday An interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing on 7/18/24 at 9:19 a.m. She indicated staff should be conducting pre and post assessments with Resident 176 on dialysis days. A dialysis policy was provided by the Assistant Director of Nursing on 7/18/24 at 10:36 a.m. The policy indicated the following,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-18 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications stored in the facility's medication carts were not expired for 1 of 6 medication carts observed within the facility. (Facility) Findings include: A review of the facility's medication storage rooms and medication carts was conducted on [DATE] at 10:05 a.m. The following was observed: On the [NAME] hallway with LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) 3, on [DATE] 10:10 a.m., the medication cart contained a multi-dose vial of Humalog insulin with an open date, of [DATE], for Resident P without an expiration date on vial or prescription medication bottle that housed vial of insulin. An interview conducted with LPN 3, on [DATE] at 10:12 a.m., she indicated all opened insulin vials should have an open date and expiration date. The open insulin vials expire after 28 days from opening. The clinical record for Resident P was reviewed on [DATE] at 1:32 p.m. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, type 2 diabetes mellitus. 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 · D2024-07-18 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 provide residents with a palatable grilled cheese sandwich for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for food. (Residents 62 and 93) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 62 was reviewed on 7/18/24 at 10:40 a.m. An Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/3/24, indicated Resident 62 was cognitively intact. The clinical record for Resident 93 was reviewed on 7/18/24 at 10:45 a.m. A Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], indicated Resident 93 was cognitively intact. An interview conducted with Resident 62, on 7/11/24 at 11:08 a.m., indicated she recently had ordered a grilled cheese sandwich from the always available menu and when she received the sandwich, she described it as two pieces of toast with a cold slice of cheese in the middle. Resident 62 indicated the sandwich was not appetizing since the cheese was not even melted on the sandwich nor had it been grilled at all. An interview conducted with Resident 93, on 7/18/24 at 12:05 p.m., 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-18 · 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 ensure infection control practices were maintained during medication administration by picking up dropped pills with bare hands and not cleaning a blood pressure device in-between resident use for 2 of 3 medication administration observations. (Residents 275, 176, 173, 72, and K) Findings include: 1. A medication administration observation was conducted on, 7/11/24 at 8:20 a.m., with Qualified Medication Aide (QMA) 2. QMA 2 was in the process of removing medication cards to prepare morning medications for Resident 275. QMA 2 prepared metoprolol (blood pressure medication) and pressed down on the medication card for Senna (medication used to treat constipation) to where a pill of Senna was dropped on the medication cart. QMA 2 picked up the pill with her bare hands and placed the Senna pill into the medication cup. QMA 2 proceeded to prepare glycopyrrolate (medication for secretions) 2 milligrams by pressing the medication card and one pill fell onto the medication cart. QMA 2 proceeded to pick up the pill…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-23 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to timely notify a cognitively impaired resident's POA (Power of Attorney) of a new medication order for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for change in condition (Resident B). Findings include: The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 2/22/24 at 1:30 p.m. The Resident's diagnosis included, but were not limited to, dementia with agitation and obstructive uropathy (retention of urine). He was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was discharged from the facility on 12/24/23. A care plan, initiated 11/18/23, indicated Resident B had impaired cognition and thought processes related to dementia with severe agitation. The goal was for him to maintain his current level of cognitive function. The interventions included, but were not limited to, administer medications as ordered and to monitor for side effects and effectiveness, initiated 11/18/23, and to communicate with the resident, family, and caregivers regarding resident's capabilities and needs. 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 · Dcited before2024-02-23 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately monitor urinary output and urine characteristics for a resident with a indwelling urinary catheter resulting in hospitalization for acute urinary tract infection and urinary obstruction for 1 of 3 resident reviewed for change in condition. (Resident B). Findings include: The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 2/22/24 at 1:30 p.m. The Resident's diagnosis included, but were not limited to, dementia with agitation and obstructive uropathy (retention of urine). He was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was discharged from the facility on 12/24/23. A care plan, initiated 11/18/23, indicated Resident B had impaired cognition and thought processes related to dementia with severe agitation. The goal was for him to maintain his current level of cognitive function. The interventions included, but were not limited to, administer medications as ordered and to monitor for side effects and effectiveness, initiated 11/18/23, and to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to monitor and assess the condition of a resident's wound, ensure two residents with wounds were provided wound care in accordance with their physician's orders, and to ensure timely application of a resident's geri-sleeves, as ordered, for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for skin conditions and to timely clarify with the medical provider to restart a medication for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 21, 29, 59, 88 and Resident 178) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident 88 was reviewed on 1/30/23 at 11:40 a.m. Diagnosis included, but was not limited to, Alzheimer's Disease, chronic kidney disease and methicillin resistant staphylococcus (MRSA) infection, and abscess of buttock. A progress note dated 2/5/23 indicated CNA [Certified Nursing Assistant] was putting Res [Resident 88] to bed. Res. sat on the edge of the bed and could not move self back further and could not get his feet under himself. H…
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 before2023-03-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) for a resident who was unable to perform oral hygiene by not providing the appropriate oral care as prescribed by a dentist and/or dental hygienist for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for ADLs. (Resident 11) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 11 was reviewed on 3/22/23 at 3:47 p.m. Resident 11's diagnoses included, but not limited to, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes type II, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Resident 11's quarterly MDS (minimum data set) dated 2/20/23 indicated, Resident 11 required extensive assistance of one person for dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident 11 had an upper denture with natural teeth lower teeth. An observation of Resident 11's teeth was made on 3/21/23 at 2:45 p.m. Resident 11's lower teeth appeared unbrushed. She had a white substance built up on her lower teeth next to her gums. A physician's order dated 12/13/18 indicated, to assist Resident 11 with daily oral hygiene every day shift. A dental…
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 before2023-03-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to recognize and address an issue with a resident's fall intervention and to assure fall interventions were implemented for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident 51 and 35). Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident 51 was reviewed on 3/21/23 at 12:07 p.m. Her diagnoses included, but were not limited to: Alzheimer's disease, anxiety, and major depressive disorder. She resided on the memory care unit of the facility. The 2/13/23 Significant Change MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment indicated she was severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of 2 persons for bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use. She required extensive assistance of 1 person for dressing and personal hygiene. When moving from a seated to standing position, she was not steady and only able to stabilize with human assistance. The fall care plan, revised 2/20/23, indicated she was at high risk for falls with injuries related to impaired cognition, gait/balance problems, and unaware of safety needs. She…
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 before2023-03-24 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assure an indwelling urinary catheter bag and tubing were not touching the floor for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for urinary catheters (Resident 12). Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 12 was reviewed on 3/22/23 at 10:35 a.m. The Resident's diagnosis included, but were not limited to, neuromuscular disfunction of the bladder and urinary tract infection. A care plan, last revised 8/9/22, indicated she had an indwelling urinary catheter due to neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. The goal was for her to remain free from catheter-related trauma. the interventions included, but were not limited to, position the catheter bag and tubing below the level of the bladder, initiated 8/9/22, and check tubing for kinks during care times each shift, initiated 8/9/22. A Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, completed 1/4/2023, indicated she was severely cognitively impaired and had a urinary catheter present. On 03/22/23 10:35 a.m., Resident 12 was observed sitting in her recliner in her room. Her…
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 · D2023-03-24 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 provide a supplement, as ordered by the physician, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for nutrition (Resident 35). Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 35 was reviewed on 3/21/23 at 3:19 p.m. The Residents diagnosis included, but were not limited to, osteoporosis and vascular dementia. An Annual MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, completed on 9/25/22, indicated she needed supervision and set up assistance with eating and that she weighed 113 pounds. She had not had weight loss. A Quarterly MDS Assessment, completed on 12/26/22, indicated she needed limited assistance of 1 person with eating and that she weighed 103 pounds. She had lost a significant amount of weight and was not on a physician prescribed weight loss regimen. She was severely cognitively impaired. A care plan, last revised on 12/26/22, indicated Resident 35 had a nutritional problem and had a significant weight loss with a BMI (Body Mass Index) less than 22. The goal was for her to maintain adequate nutritional status as evidenced by…
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 · D2023-03-24 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure 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 follow the appropriate guidelines for tube feedings per facility policy by not labeling tube feeding bags as required, not capping a tube feeding properly when not in use, and not administering the tube feeding as ordered for 1 of 1 residents with tube feedings. (Resident 20) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 20 was reviewed on 3/23/23 at 1:57 p.m. Resident 20's diagnoses included, but not limited to, Parkinson's disease, dementia, dysphagia (difficulty with eating/swallowing), stage IV pressure ulcer, and moderate protein-calorie malnutrition. An observation of Resident 20 was made on 3/22/23 at 9:43 a.m. Resident 20 was lying in her bed and had her tube feeding running. The tube feeding bag nor the water flush bag contained a label indicating the contents of each bag, the resident's name, the date and time of administration, nor the initials of the nurse who prepped the feed. A 60 ml (milliliter) syringe was dated 3/21/23 was on the bedside table in its opened package. An observation of…
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 before2023-03-24 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management 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 assess a location of a resident's pain, and develop and implement non-pharmacological interventions to address a resident's pain for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pain. (Resident 88) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 88 was reviewed on 3/21/23 at 11:40 a.m. Diagnosis included, but was not limited to, chronic pain, skin changes, and heart disease. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident 88 was cognitively intact. A physician order dated 1/30/23 indicated Resident 88 was to receive 2 tablets of 325 milligrams of Tylenol every 4 hours for pain as needed. The March 2023 Medication Administration Record indicated Resident 88 had received the two tablets of Tylenol as needed utilizing a pain scale of 1 being the least amount of pain to 10 being the most amount pain on the following days: 3/12/23 - pain level 3 - no documented pain location - documented as follow up pain level of a 2, 3/15/23 - pain…
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 before2023-03-24 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored in a secure location for 1 of 5 medication carts reviewed. Findings include: An observation was conducted of 1 of 2 medication carts on [NAME] Commons on 3/21/23 at 10:35 a.m. There were 4 medication cards containing Coumadin (blood thinning medication) for Resident 73 located within the narcotic log binder on the medication cart. An observation conducted on 3/21/23 at 11:22 a.m., still noted the 4 medication cards within the narcotic log binder for Resident 73. An interview conducted with Unit Coordinator 2, on 3/22/23 at 10:45 a.m., indicated she was organizing the medication cart and realized that Resident 73 no longer took Coumadin and she removed such from the medication cart. A policy titled Medication Storage Policy, revised November 2017, was provided by the Director of Nursing on 3/24/23 at 8:48 a.m. The policy indicated the following, .Policy .It is the policy of this facility to ensure all medications housed on our premises will be stored in the pharmacy and/or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-24 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to timely follow up on a dental recommendation for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for dental services (Resident 73). Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 73 was reviewed on 3/21/23 at 3:29 p.m. The Resident's diagnosis included, but were not limited to, cerebrovascular disease and heart failure. A Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, completed 1/24/23, indicated she was cognitively intact. During an interview on 3/21/23 at 3:29 p.m., Resident 73 indicated she had a broken tooth and that it had been broken quite a while. She pointed to her right front tooth, which had a chip at the bottom of the tooth. She would like to have it fixed because she did not like how it looked. She had seen the dentist since chipping her tooth, but it had not been fixed yet. On 3/23/23 at 10:43 a.m., the Director of Nursing provided a dental consult report dated 9/30/22, which indicated that Resident 73 had her natural upper and lower teeth. Tooth # 8 presented with a chip which was to be restored. The recommendations…
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 BHI SENIOR LIVING — 9 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 4.0 | -2.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 3.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.0★, 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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HANCOCK REGIONAL HOSPITAL | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 02/01/2012 |
| BOND, MARIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| CLARK, TIMOTHY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2012 |
| DAUGHERTY, JOSHUA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2020 |
| FELKER, DEAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2012 |
| JOYNER, SARA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2019 |
| MILLER, JAMES | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2012 |
| WILLARD, LACEY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2022 |
| WILSON, ROY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2012 |
| LONG, STEVEN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 08/01/2014 |
| WESTMINSTER VILLAGE NORTH, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2012 |
| GASKINS, CHUCK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/28/2014 |
| BLOOMSTROM, JOHN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| CALDWELL, JEFFREY | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| DALTON, DOUGLASS | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| DATTILO, JOHN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| ELLIS, BRIAN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| JONES, L. DEAN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| KELLY, BETH | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| KOSELKE, ELIZABETH | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| MEREDITH, WENDY | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| MILLER, ROGER | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| RICHARDSON, JANE | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| ROBBINS, FRED | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| SEIGEL, JANE | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| TERP, JEFFREY | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| WEIDEMAN II, ROGER | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/07/2025 |
| BHI RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2012 |
| BHI SENIOR LIVING, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2012 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 41 rows in the source record cover these 29 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
4 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $5.0M 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
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 155167. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.