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

Lowell Healthcare

710 Michigan St, Lowell, IN 46356 · For profit - Corporation · 86 certified beds · (219) 696-7791 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (219) 696-7791 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 12 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (35% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
27648 Morse Dt · (219) 696-6258 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.9 mi
1704 E Commercial Ave · (219) 696-6638 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Aldi1.0 mi
1720 E Commercial Ave · (855) 955-2534 · Call to confirm hours
Park
243 N Freemont St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 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 improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased3.1%11.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.5%5.5%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.4%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms25.7%25.2%6.5%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.3%3.9%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened3.7%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication8.9%23.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.4%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.8%3.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control15.5%23.3%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table3.0%13.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission19.3%22.2%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit4.6%10.8%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.111.611.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.131.441.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

51.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 45 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

51.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
13.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.22U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.08hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.09hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 13.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 23 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 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 28% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF51.6%CMS range 40.0–65.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.0%CMS range 6.5–16.110.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge13.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge26.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge13.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened11.1%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.0%CMS range 4.0–13.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.991.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.76
RN hours/ resident / day
0.67
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.17
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.60
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.54
RN hoursweekends
34.6%
Total nursing turnover
23.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 86 beds and averages 76.1 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.60 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.17 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.99 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.85 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.85 to 0.54 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-13)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-12-12)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor 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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's dignity was maintained related to an uncovered urinary catheter bag for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for dignity. (Resident 8)Finding includes:On 2/9/26 at 3:10 p.m. Resident 8 was observed lying in bed. A urinary catheter bag was hanging from the side of the bed with visible urine in the bag. There was no cover over the bag, and the bag was visible from the hallway.On 2/10/26 at 10:24 a.m. Resident 8 was observed lying in bed. A urinary catheter bag was hanging from the side of the bed with visible urine in the bag. There was no cover over the bag, and the bag was visible from the hallway.On 2/11/26 at 11:07 a.m. Resident 8 was observed lying in bed. A urinary catheter bag was hanging from the side of the bed with visible urine in the bag. There was no cover over the bag, and the bag was visible from the hallway.Record review for Resident 8 was completed on 2/11/26 at 11:26 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, hypertension, osteoarthritis, and obstructive uropathy.The Quarterly…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were assessed for self-administration of medications and had a physician's order to self-administer medications for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for self-administration of medication. (Resident 60)Finding includes:On 2/11/26 at 9:12 a.m., LPN 1 was observed preparing Resident 60's medications, which included Miralax (polyethylene glycol, a laxative medication) 17 grams. She dissolved the medication in a cup of water and entered the resident's room to administer the medications. The resident took his pills and drank a few sips of the Miralax then set the cup on his bedside table. LPN 1 indicated she would come back later and assist him with finishing the Miralax. She completed administering the resident's other medications, exited the room, and returned to the Nurse's Station. She left the Miralax in the resident's room and had not stayed with the resident to ensure the medication was taken. Record review for Resident 60 was completed on 2/11/26 at 12:08 p.m. Diagnoses included, but were not…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide ADL (activities of daily living) assistance to dependent residents related to removing facial hair for female residents for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for ADL care. (Resident 45)Finding includes: On 2/9/26 at 11:29 a.m., Resident 45 was observed sitting in her wheelchair watching television. The resident had facial hair observed on her chin. On 2/11/26 at 9:43 a.m. and 11:42 a.m., Resident 45 was observed with facial hair on her chin. Resident 45's record was reviewed on 2/12/26 at 3:18 p.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's disease. A Care Plan, dated 9/7/16, indicated the resident required assistance with activities of daily living. Interventions included, but were not limited to, assist with bathing as needed, assist with showers twice weekly in the morning and partial bath in between per resident's preference. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/17/25, indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired and required partial/moderate assistance 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received proper treatment and care related to oxygen administration and humidity bottles that were outdated for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Residents 72, 15, and 10)Findings include: 1. On 2/9/26 at 11:41 a.m., Resident 72 was observed in bed with oxygen on via a nasal cannula. The resident indicated she administered the oxygen when she felt she needed it. The oxygen concentrator was set to 1.5 liters per minute and had a humidity bottle attached that was dated 1/19/26. On 2/11/26 at 9:25 a.m., Resident 72 was observed asleep in bed. She was wearing a nasal cannula attached to the oxygen concentrator set to 1.5 liters per minute. The humidity bottle was dated 1/19/26. Resident 72's record was reviewed on 2/12/26 at 3:36 p.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease A Physician's Order, dated 8/21/24, indicated change oxygen tubing and humidity once a day on Sunday. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/11/25,…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices and standards were maintained, related to staff touching pills during medication administration for 1 of 5 residents observed during medication administration. (Resident 60) Finding includes:On 2/11/26 at 9:12 a.m., LPN 1 was observed preparing Resident 60's medications, which included 10 pills. She popped each pill out of the medication cards one at a time, into her hand, and then put them in a medication cup. She then administered the medications to the resident.During an interview on 2/11/26 at 11:17 a.m., the Director of Nursing was made aware LPN 1 had touched the medications with her hands.A facility policy, titled Medication Administration (Medication Pass Procedure), indicated, .5. Medications are opened without contaminating.3.1-18(b)

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-12-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to serve food under sanitary conditions related to touching food with dirty gloves. This had the potential to affect 76 residents who received food from the kitchen. (Main Kitchen) Findings include: 1. During a follow-up tour of the kitchen on 12/11/24 at 12:00 p.m., [NAME] 1 was observed donning gloves. He picked up a box of cellophane wrap and moved it, then picked up a cardboard box containing frozen sausage patties. He opened the box of the frozen sausage patties with the same gloved hands, opened the plastic bag inside, scooped out handfuls of the sausage patties with the same gloved hands, and placed the patties on a baking sheet. He did not perform hand hygiene or change his gloves during the preparation of the food. 2. On 12/11/24 at 12:03 p.m., the Dietary Food Manager (DFM) was observed preparing food for lunch. She had placed a baking sheet that was covered by a single layer of cellophane wrap on the food preparation counter. She manipulated the cellophane wrap to try and cover the baking sheet…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices and standards were maintained, related to staff touching pills during medication administration for 3 of 6 residents observed during medication administration. (Residents 71, 10, and 9) The facility also failed to ensure reuseable equipment was disinfected after use on residents for 2 of 6 residents observed during medication administration. (Residents 10 and 47) Findings include: 1. On 12/11/24 at 9:06 a.m., QMA 1 was observed preparing Resident 71's medications. She popped each pill out of the medication cards one at a time, into her hand, and then put them in a medication cup. She then administered the medications to the resident and continued to the next resident. At 9:17 a.m., QMA 1 was observed preparing Resident 10's medications. She popped multiple pills out of the medication cards one at a time, into her hand, and then put them in a medication cup. She then administered the medications to the resident and continued to the next resident. At 9:33 a.m., QMA 1 was…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident with edema received the necessary care and treatment related to Medigrips (elastic type stocking) not in place as ordered for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for edema. (Resident 12) Finding includes: On 12/8/24 at 1:18 p.m., Resident 12 was observed seated in her wheelchair. Her legs were discolored a light purple and swollen, there were no Medigrips on her legs. On 12/10/24 at 1:22 p.m., the resident was observed in bed. Her legs were discolored, swollen and there were no Medigrips in place. On 12/11/24 at 9:38 a.m., the resident was observed with RN 1 seated in her wheelchair. There were no Medigrips in place. The RN indicated she was unsure who was responsible for putting them on or removing them. The RN later indicated the Medigrip order had been discontinued. The resident's record was reviewed on 12/10/24 at 10:54 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, venous insufficiency, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure and dementia. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, dated…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident received the necessary treatment for a pressure ulcer related to the incorrect treatment provided during wound care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. (Resident 73) Finding includes: On 12/11/24 at 9:15 a.m., Resident 73's wound care was observed with the Wound Nurse. The resident had a stage 4 pressure ulcer to her sacral area. The nurse positioned the resident on her left side and removed the old dressing. She cleansed the wound bed with Anasept (a wound cleanser) and gauze. She then applied a sheet of collagen to the wound bed and a piece of Maxorb (absorbent material used for wounds). The wound nurse then used an absorbent island border dressing to cover the wound. The resident's record was reviewed on 12/9/24 at 12:55 p.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, multiple sclerosis, diabetes mellitus and stage 4 pressure ulcer. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 11/22/24, indicated the resident was cognitively intact and required moderate assistance for…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a medication was kept in a locked medication cart at all times for 1 of 6 residents observed during medication administration. (Resident 10) Finding includes: On 12/11/24 at 9:17 a.m., QMA 1 was observed preparing medications for Resident 10. She indicated she could not find the resident's Miralax (a laxative medication) so she could not administer it. She notified RN 1 that she could not find the medication. RN 1 indicated she would look in the medication room to see if it was with the overflow medications. QMA 1 finished preparing the resident's other medications and gave them to the resident. On 12/11/24 at 9:33 a.m., QMA 1 began preparing Resident 9's medications. RN 1 approached the medication cart and indicated she was able to get Resident 10's Miralax from the Pyxis (a medication dispensing machine). She handed the Miralax medication to QMA 1. QMA 1 wrote Resident 10's name on the medication and set it on top of the medication cart. She then continued to prepare Resident 9's medications, entered…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-29 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received the necessary treatment and services related to the lack of monitoring and assessments of a skin discoloration for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for non-pressure skin conditions. (Resident 47) Finding includes: On 1/23/24 at 11:28 a.m., Resident 47 was observed with a reddened area noted on her nose. The resident indicated it was from her BiPAP (bilevel positive airway pressure) mask that she wore at night. On 1/24/24 at 9:19 a.m., Resident 47 was observed sitting in a chair. She had a reddened area noted on the bridge of her nose. On 1/25/24 at 2:28 p.m., Resident 47 was observed sitting up in a chair. She had a reddened area with a small scab present, along with an indentation on the bridge of her nose. Resident 47's record was reviewed on 1/24/24 at 9:00 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic respiratory failure, obstructive sleep apnea, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The State Optional Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/9/23, indicated the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-29 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% for 1 of 5 residents observed during medication pass. Two errors were observed during 30 opportunities for errors during medication administration. This resulted in a medication error rate of 6.67%. (Resident 282) Finding includes: On 1/24/24 at 11:11 a.m., RN 1 was observed preparing Resident 282's medications to be administered via a gastrostomy tube (g-tube, a tube inserted through the belly that brings nutrition to the stomach). The nurse crushed 2 different medications, which included 1 Nephro Vite (vitamin) tablet and 1 Carafate (anti-ulcer medication) tablet. She poured the crushed medications together into a plastic cup and added an unmeasured amount of water. The RN indicated she added approximately 30 ml (milliliters of water to the medications). She then proceeded to check for placement of the g-tube by auscultation. She flushed the g-tube with 30 ml of water and then administered the cup with the 2 medications into the tube. The nurse then…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES — 90 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.9+1.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.4+0.6 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.3+0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.7+0.3 vs chain
The other 89 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Valparaiso Care & RehabilitationValparaiso, IN 2 of 5Arbor Grove VillageGreensburg, IN 2 of 5Bethany VillageIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Columbia Healthcare CenterEvansville, IN 2 of 5Community Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Eagle Valley MeadowsIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Harcourt Terrace Nursing And RehabilitationIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Harrison TerraceIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Hickory Creek At New CastleNew Castle, IN 2 of 5Maple Park VillageWestfield, IN 2 of 5Park Terrace VillageEvansville, IN 2 of 5Riverside VillageElkhart, IN 2 of 5Trailpoint VillageSouth Bend, IN 2 of 5University Nursing CenterUpland, IN 2 of 5Williamsport Nursing And RehabilitationWilliamsport, IN 3 of 5Allisonville MeadowsFishers, IN 3 of 5American VillageIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Brownsburg MeadowsBrownsburg, IN 3 of 5Countryside MeadowsAvon, IN 3 of 5East Lake Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterElkhart, IN 3 of 5Hickory Creek At CrawfordsvilleCrawfordsville, IN 3 of 5Hillcrest VillageJeffersonville, IN 3 of 5North Capitol Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Rosebud VillageRichmond, IN 3 of 5Rosewalk VillageIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Rosewalk Village At LafayetteLafayette, IN 3 of 5Spring Mill MeadowsIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Stonebrooke Rehabilitation CenterNew Castle, IN 4 of 5Autumn Ridge Rehabilitation CentreWabash, IN 4 of 5Beech Grove MeadowsBeech Grove, IN 4 of 5Clark Rehabilitation And Skilled Nursing CenterClarksville, IN 4 of 5Clinton GardensClinton, IN 4 of 5Creekside VillageMishawaka, IN 4 of 5Edgewater WoodsAnderson, IN 4 of 5Forest Creek VillageIndianapolis, IN 4 of 5Franklin MeadowsFranklin, IN 4 of 5Heritage House Rehabilitation & Health Care CenterConnersville, IN 4 of 5Hickory Creek At ColumbusColumbus, IN 4 of 5Hickory Creek At MadisonMadison, IN 4 of 5Hickory Creek At PeruPeru, IN

Showing 40 of 89; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
HORN, BRENDAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 12/01/2023
BABCOCK, PAULIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/30/2020
AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2012
BAILEY, EMILYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/17/2026
DICE, MARKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023
TEODORI, KRISTINEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2019
VAN CAMP, STEVENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023
WASHINGTON, YOLANDAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/11/2015

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$8.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$959K
Related-party expense11% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 84%Medicare 5%Other / private 11%

About 84% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $959K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% 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

$310per resident / day
operating cost
$9,431per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$314per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in IN

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 155448. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-13, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next