Miller's Merry Manor
505 N Bradner Ave, Marion, IN 46952 · For profit - Corporation · 176 certified beds · (765) 662-3981 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- 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 1 actual-harm citation
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (56%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 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 | 12.6% | 11.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.7% | 5.5% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.7% | 0.4% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.5% | 1.1% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 25.2% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.2% | 3.9% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.8% | 11.9% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.1% | 23.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.7% | 95.4% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.0% | 3.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.6% | 23.3% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.6% | 13.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.7% | 79.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.0% | 22.2% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 12.8% | 10.8% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.19 | 1.61 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.21 | 1.44 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
52.9% 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 70 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 30.4% 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 25% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% 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 | 52.9%CMS range 42.3–62.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.7%CMS range 6.4–14.0 | 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 | 30.4% | 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 | 30.4% | 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 | 43.5% | 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 | 96.7% | 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 | not 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 stay | 3.3% | 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 | 6.7% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.4%CMS range 3.3–11.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.92 | 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 176 beds and averages 71.9 residents a day — about 41% occupied, or roughly 104 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.10 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.80 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is well above 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
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.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · G2025-06-03 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for a cognitively impaired resident to prevent repeated falls for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents. This deficiency resulted in Resident D sustaining multiple fractures to the vertebrae, ribs, and pelvis. Finding includes: During an observation, on 6/2/25 at 9:49 a.m., Resident D lay on his back in his low bed with his eyes closed in his darkened room. A visitor sat in a chair in his room. Resident D's clinical record was reviewed on 6/2/25 at 10:54 a.m. Diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology, unspecified dementia, urinary tract infection, site not specified, bacteriuria, retention of urine, unspecified, and benign prostatic hyperplasia (enlarged prostate) (BPH). Current orders included low bed with floor mat, keep bed in lowest position when in bed every shift (3/22/25), donepezil (for dementia) 5 milligrams (mg) daily at bedtime(3/19/25), sertraline…
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 · E2026-01-06 · tag F0680 — patternEnsure the activities program is directed by a qualified professional.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the Activities Program was directed by a qualified professional who met required training and certification standards prior to assuming the role of Activities Director. This failure had the potential to affect 69 of 69 residents who relied on the activities program to meet their psychosocial, emotional, and social needs. Findings include:During a review of employee records on 12/31/25 at 8:40 a.m., records indicated the Activities Director (AD) lacked the required training and/or certification for the position. The records lacked evidence of completion of an approved activities training course or documentation demonstrating qualifications consistent with regulatory requirements at the time the individual was hired into the position.During an interview with the AD on 1/6/25 at 9:52 a.m., she indicated she had been in the position since 12/1/25. Prior to becoming the AD, she was the assistant to the AD. There was no training required to be the assistant. After being hired as the AD, 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 before2026-01-06 · 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
A. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to utilize infection prevention and control strategies for draining venous wounds to mitigate risk of contamination to the wounds and the risk of exposure to bodily fluids for others for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for pressure injuries. (Resident 64) B. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain foley catheter tubing and drainage bags in a sanitary manner for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for foley catheters. (Residents 68 and 82) Findings include:A. During an observation, on 12/29/25 at 11:09 a.m., Resident 64 shuffled out of her room, using a two-wheel walker and wearing nonskid socks. Resident 64's clinical record was reviewed on 12/31/25 at 9:21 a.m. Diagnoses included old myocardial infarction (heart attack), generalized edema, atherosclerotic heart disease of the native coronary artery without angina pectoris, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, altered mental status, dementia, lymphedema, and peripheral vascular disease. Current orders included the following: Wash…
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 · Fcited before2024-11-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was served under sanitary methods regarding food handling, hand washing, and glove use. This deficient practice had the potential to impact 73 of 73 residents who received meals in the facility. Findings include: 1. A completed Roster Matrix form, provided by the facility on 10/30/24 following the entrance conference, indicated the facility had no residents who received nutrition by any alternate means other than oral eating. During a lunch meal service observation on 11/4/23 from 11:40 a.m. to 12:03 p.m., the following concerns regarding sanitary food preparation and distribution were made: Cook 5 wore gloves. She touched the outside of meal trays, thermal plate bases, heated tray pallets, bread bags, bread rolls, and cheese with her gloved hands. She did not change her gloved hands as she touched the various items. She used her solid gloved hands to open the bread rolls and placed cheese slices inside the roll. Using the same gloved hands, she handed the prepped roll to [NAME] 4, who took 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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's urinary catheter was handled in a manner to support the resident's dignity when the drainage bag was left in the view of sight of others within the facility. (Resident 68) Findings include: During an observation on 11/1/24 at 10:11 a.m., Resident 68's was in bed, with the catheter bag hanging on the right side of the bed frame. The bag was exposed and urine could be seen in the bag. During an observation on 11/6/24 at 9:47 a.m., the resident was in bed, with the urinary catheter bag hanging on the right side of the bed frame. The bag was exposed and urine could be seen in the bag. Resident 68's clinical record was reviewed on 11/6/24 at 10:50 a.m. Physician orders, dated 5/15/24, indicated catheter care should be performed every shift. The catheter drainage bag was to be below the waist and covered every shift. During a catheter care observation on 11/7/24 at 10:16 a.m., RN 3 indicated there was a device on the left side of the resident's bed, on the railing, which contained the catheter…
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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
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 serve a therapeutic pureed diet as ordered by a physician for 2 of 2 residents reviewed who received pureed diets ( Residents 42 and 43). Findings include: During a lunch meal observation on 11/4/24 from 11:20 a.m. to 11:47 a.m., a regular gelatin dessert with whipped topping was served to Residents 42 and 43. The gelatin was cubed in shape and topped with whipped cream. The cubes were solid pieces of gelatin. Both Residents 42 and 43 consumed a portion of the regular gelatin. During an observation on 11/4/24 at 11:50 a.m., Resident 43's meal ticket indicated gravy to meat and potatoes. Resident 43's meat and potatoes contained no gravy, nor was there gravy provided for a staff member to use for topping the food. A current facility lunch meal, portion size and texture serving guide (also known as a spread sheet), dated 11/4/24 and provided by the Administrator on 11/7/24 at 10:50 a.m., indicated residents who had pureed diet orders were menued to receive a 1/2 (#8 scoop) of pureed gelatin topped with whipped…
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 before2024-11-07 · 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
A. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were followed according to facility policy and physician orders during wound care for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for wounds. (Resident 23) B. Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff administered medications in a sanitary manner for 1 of 2 residents observed for medication administration. (Resident 20) Findings include: A. Resident 23's clinical record was reviewed on 11/6/24 at 3:02 p.m. Diagnoses included acute diastolic (congestive) heart failure, (other) abnormalities of gait and mobility, Type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories, unspecified fracture of left femur, and difficulty in walking. Current physician orders included (9/9/24) apply povidone iodine to left heel every shift for wound care, (6/7/24) skin protectant to right heel for skin protection, and (6/4/24) EBP during high-contact resident care. A current care plan, dated 6/4/24, indicated the resident required EBP…
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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure pneumococcal vaccination (to protect against the bacterium Streptococcus pneumoniae) was offered or administered for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for immunizations. (Residents 32, 53, and 14) Findings include: 1. Resident 32's clinical record was reviewed on 11/4/24 at 11:40 a.m. Diagnoses included left-side non-dominant hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebrovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and type 2 diabetes mellitus. The resident admitted in 2020. Resident 32's immunization record indicated an undated refusal for the pneumococcal 13-valent conjugate vaccine (PCV 13) and pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV 23). A Pneumococcal/Prevnar 13 Vaccine Consent form, provided by the Infection Preventionist on 11/7/24 at 11:09 a.m., indicated the resident had refused the above vaccines on 2/28/20. During an interview, on 11/7/24 at 11:09 a.m., the Infection Preventionist indicated she discussed the importance 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 · Fcited before2024-05-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored in a sanitary manner regarding dating and labeling foods, and failed to ensure the kitchen and equipment was maintained in a sanitary manner. This deficient practice had the potential to impact 66 residents who received meals prepared in the kitchen of 67 in the facility. Findings include: During a kitchen tour, accompanied by Dietary Aide 8, on 5/9/24 at 8:56 a.m., the following was observed: a. The walk-in refrigerator had undated and unlabeled foods as follows: a piece of meat in a tin pan, identified by the Dietary Aide as Salisbury steak, eight dessert cups contained honey dew melon, a dessert cup with a sliced tomato and sliced onion, a clear container with a green lid that contained a tan colored liquid identified by the Dietary Aide as chicken noodle soup, three foam cups contained sliced onion, sliced pickle and sliced tomato in each cup, four dessert cups contained mixed fruit, one dessert cup contained a brown and white substance identified by the Dietary Aide as chocolate…
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 · D2024-01-30 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement individualized interventions to prevent the worsening of a pressure injury. (Resident 63) Finding includes: During an observation, on 1/25/24 at 9:15 a.m., Resident 63 was sitting on the edge of his bed looking at items on his bedside table. During an observation, on 1/26/24 at 10:24 a.m., the resident was lying on his back in bed with his eyes closed. During an observation, on 1/26/23 at 4:08 p.m., the resident was sitting in his wheelchair in his room. During an observation, on 1/29/24 at 11:30 a.m., the resident was sitting on the edge of his bed feeding himself lunch. Resident 63's clinical record was reviewed on 1/26/24 at 3:36 p.m. His diagnoses included depression, generalized anxiety disorder, metabolic encephalopathy, combined systolic and diastolic congestive heart failure, end stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, fracture of the neck of the left femur, and polyneuropathy. His current physician orders included protein supplement two times a day (dated 1/16/24) and wash left…
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 · D2024-01-30 · 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 biologicals requiring refrigeration for Residents 55 and 122 were monitored per CDC guidelines for 2 of 2 refrigerators reviewed for medication/biological storage. Findings include: During an observation of the North 2 nursing unit medication storage room on 1/30/24 at 9:43 a.m., the medication refrigerator was locked. At the same time, the ADON indicated the medication room refrigerator temperature was checked daily and contained medications and vaccines. She did not have a key to the refrigerator. During an observation of the Boulevard nursing unit medication storage room on 1/30/24 at 9:53 a.m., the refrigerator contained a COVID 19 vaccine for Resident 55. At the same time, QMA 4 indicated she did not know what was usually kept in the refrigerator, as she did not pass insulin or typically have refrigerated medications she administered on the unit. The refrigerator temperature was checked daily by night shift. Review of a facility document, titled Med Room Refrigerator Temperature Settings, provided…
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 before2024-01-30 · 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff followed physician orders for enhanced barrier precautions during an aerosol-generating procedure for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Resident 15) Finding includes: Resident 15's medical record was reviewed on 1/26/24 at 10:22 a.m. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (an insufficient amount of oxygen), and generalized anxiety disorder. Her physician's orders included droplet isolation precautions during tracheostomy care, suctioning, and aerosol treatments (dated 4/20/22) and enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) during high contact resident care for her tracheostomy (dated 5/26/23). During an observation, on 1/25/24 at 3:15 p.m., a sign on the resident's door indicated enhanced barrier precautions were to be performed by anyone performing high-contact resident care activities. Instructions included performing hand hygiene and wearing gloves and a gown, when caring for or accessing the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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 MILLER'S MERRY MANOR — 14 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 | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 3.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 3.7 | -1.7 vs chain |
The other 13 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.5★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JOHNSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 06/01/2013 |
| DUNKLE, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| FORVIS MAZARS, LLP | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2023 |
| MILLERS HEALTH SYSTEMS INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2013 |
| THERACARE INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| BOYLE, PATRICK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| DECOLA, ROBERT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| HAUG, LORI | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| JUDAY, PAULA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| ROBINSON, TINA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| SRIKANTH, SHANKARAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 11 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.
About 74% 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 $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
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 155173. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-06, 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.