Hickory Creek At New Castle
901 N 16th Street, New Castle, IN 47362 · Non profit - Other · 36 certified beds · (765) 529-4695 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2026
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (69%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 19% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 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 | 3.8% | 11.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.7% | 5.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.5% | 1.1% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 61.2% | 25.2% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.1% | 3.9% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.4% | 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 | 100.0% | 95.4% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.4% | 3.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.3% | 23.3% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 23.1% | 13.6% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.16 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 13% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 36 beds and averages 31.1 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 5 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 3.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.88 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 3.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.67 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.62 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 69% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
16 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-29 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from sexual abuse by a resident for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident B)Findings include:An interview was conducted with Resident B on 5/26/26 at 1:16 p.m. She indicated she was abused in the facility about a month ago. Resident D touched her breasts. It happened in her room. The door was shut, and Resident D came into the room to give her candy, and Resident D grabbed Resident B's breast. Resident B felt uneasy about it. Resident B had waited a couple of days to tell, but the Executive Director (ED) knew all about it. Resident B was unsure why she waited to tell. Resident B would not talk to or even look at Resident D any longer. The investigation into the above allegation was provided by the ED on 5/27/26 at 10:45 a.m. It included the follow-up incident report, an interview with Resident D, an interview with Resident B, staff interviews with no concerns, multiple resident interviews, and documentation of 15-minute checks on Resident B beginning 4/6/26.The follow-up…
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 · D2026-05-29 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide sufficient information to describe the results of an abuse investigation to the Indiana Department Of Health (IDOH) for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for abuse. (Residents B and D)Findings include:The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 5/26/26 at 1:05 p.m. Resident B's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, major depressive disorder (serious mood disorder) and insomnia (inability to sleep).The clinical record for Resident D was reviewed on 5/26/26 at 1:10 p.m. Resident D's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, depression (serious mood disorder) and anxiety (a feeling of fear and stress).An interview was conducted with Resident B on 5/26/26 at 1:16 p.m. She indicated she was abused in the facility about a month ago. Resident D touched her breasts. It happened in her room. The door was shut, and Resident D came into the room to give her candy, and Resident D grabbed Resident B's breast. Resident B felt uneasy about it. The Executive Director (ED) knew all about it. Resident B waited a couple of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-29 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to implement a resident's comprehensive care plan interventions to prevent falls for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident 1) Findings include:The clinical record for Resident 1 was reviewed on 5/27/26 at 9:58 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, osteoporosis (fragile bones), Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (rare, severe form of childhood-onset epilepsy [chronic neurological disorder characterized by recurrent, unprovoked seizures]), and anxiety (feelings of worry and tension). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/17/26, indicated Resident 1 was severely cognitively impaired, had no behaviors for rejecting care, had non-traumatic brain dysfunction, and was at risk for falls. During an observation on 5/26/26 at 12:46 p.m., and 5/27/26 at 11:31 a.m., and 1:36 p.m., Resident 1 was lying in bed without a helmet on their head and the bed was not in the lowest position. A progress note, dated 11/19/25 at 1:20 p.m. indicated Resident 1 had an unwitnessed fall out of their bed…
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 · D2026-05-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a nebulizer was stored in a bag to promote infection control measures (Resident 23), failed to ensure oxygen tubing was dated (Resident 1), and failed to ensure ear protectors were implemented as ordered by the physician (Resident 1) for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory services. Findings include: 1, The clinical record for Resident 23 was reviewed on 5/29/2026 at 11:14 AM. The medical diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease) is a long-term lung condition that damages and narrows your airways which makes it hard to breathe, especially when gases and mucus build up in your lungs.A quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 3/24/2026, indicated Resident 23 was cognitively intact, received respiratory therapy for at least fifteen minutes each day, and was independent with upper body dressing without impairments to bilateral upper extremities. A care plan, dated 8/12/2024 and last revised 3/30/2026,…
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 · D2026-05-29 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to timely schedule an imaging appointment required for a pain specialist appointment for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pain management. (Resident 8) Findings include:The clinical record for Resident 8 was reviewed on 5/26/26 at 2:37 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, intervertebral disc degeneration (progressive breakdown of the rubbery cushions [discs] between the spine's vertebrae), lumbar region (lower back) with discogenic (originates from damaged discs) back pain and lower extremity pain and spinal stenosis (narrowing of the spaces within the spine, which puts pressure on the spinal cords and nerves). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 4/7/26, indicated Resident 8 was cognitively intact, used a wheelchair, needed substantial/maximal assistance with sitting to stand and chair to bed transfers, and received scheduled pain medication. During an interview with Resident 8 on 5/26/26 at 1:12 p.m., Resident 8 indicated their back had been hurting really bad and they had been waiting to see…
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 · D2026-05-29 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to hold a resident's medication, as ordered, when their blood pressure results were out of parameters for administration for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. (Resident 23)Findings include:The clinical record for Resident 23 was reviewed on 5/29/26 at 11:20 a.m. Resident 23's diagnosis included, but were not limited to, hypertension.The at risk for ineffective tissue perfusion care plan, revised 3/30/26, indicated the goal was for Resident 23 to maintain adequate tissue perfusion as evidenced by blood pressure within normal limits, no change in mental status, and no complaints of dizziness/lightheadedness/syncope, and edema. Two of the interventions were to administer medications as ordered and to monitor vital signs.The physician's orders for Resident 23, dated May 2026, indicated to administer one 10 mg tablet of Amlodipine (medication to treat high blood pressure) once a day, and to hold if the systolic blood pressure result was less than 100 or if the diastolic blood pressure (bottom reading of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from verbal and mental abuse by a staff member to where the resident exhibited behaviors such as irritability and verbal disappointment in response to the staff member's presence for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident D)Findings include:The clinical record for Resident D was reviewed on 8/11/25 at 11:27 a.m. His diagnoses included, but were not limited to, depression, anxiety, pseudobulbar affect, hemiplegia, and hemiparesis. The 6/24/25 Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment indicated he was moderately cognitively impaired. A care plan, last reviewed/revised 7/7/25, indicated his cognition level could fluctuate throughout the day. A care plan, last reviewed/revised 7/7/25, indicated he was at risk for signs and symptoms of anxiety, and could have episodes of uncontrolled outbursts. The goal was for him to not have increased signs and symptoms of anxiety or uncontrolled outbursts. Approaches were to encourage him to verbalize fears and anxiety, and to offer validation and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-12 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to administer Resident B's psychotropic medications as ordered and failed to implement Resident D's behavioral care plan for management of behavioral outburst for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for behavioral care management. (Resident B and Resident D)Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 8/11/2025 at 1:10 p.m. The medical diagnoses included stroke and behavioral disturbances. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 7/16/2025, indicated Resident B had moderate cognitive impairment and exhibited behaviors of verbal aggression towards others. A psychotropic medication care plan for Resident B, initiated on 8/1/2024 and revised 7/28/2025, indicated an intervention to administer medications as ordered. A physician's order, dated 6/25/2025, indicated to administer an antipsychotic medication via intramuscular injection every second month on the 25th of the month. Review of the Medication Administration Record for June of 2025, indicated that Resident B did not receive her dose of intramuscular…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-12 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to determine residents' ability to consent and establish individualized resident-centered care plans for a resident-to-resident relationships for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for resident-to-resident relationships. (Resident B and Resident C)Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 8/11/2025 at 1:10 p.m. The medical diagnoses included stroke and behavioral disturbances.A Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 7/16/2025, indicated Resident B had moderate cognitive impairments.During an interview with Resident B on 8/11/2025 at 12:38 p.m., Resident B indicated she was in a relationship with Resident C. The relationship entailed her holding hands, playing cards, and kissing Resident C.Review of clinical record did not establish an assessment of Resident B's ability to consent nor care plans for Resident B's sexuality and relationship with Resident C.2. The clinical record for Resident C was reviewed on 8/11/2025 at 1:30 p.m. The medical diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease…
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 before2025-05-08 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide eight consecutive hours of registered nurse (RN) coverage daily for 2 of 30 days reviewed. This deficient practice had the protentional to affect all 35 residents. Findings include: Preliminary review of the survey, completed on 5/4/2025 at 8:35 a.m., indicated the facility had a nurse-staffing waiver for RN coverage of eight consecutive hours every day. Review of the nursing schedule from April 4, 2025, through May 5, 2025, indicated the facility did not have RN coverage for the following days: April 20, 2025, and May 3, 2025. During an interview on 5/6/2025 at 12:45 p.m., the Executive Director (ED) indicated the facility will continue to utilize the RN waiver at that time. Overall, their staffing of RNs had improved, but not completely stabilized at that time. They are currently using as needed (PRN) RNs as well as their DON as the RN coverage, but it was mainly PRN RNs, and it was not consistent enough to get rid of the waiver currently. During an interview on 5/8/2025 at 11:35 a.m., the ED indicated there were…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 6 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-08 · 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
2. The clinical record for Resident 7 was reviewed on 5/6/2025 at 1:22 p.m. The medical diagnoses included bilateral lower limb amputations and major depression. An Annual MDS assessment, dated 3/18/2025, indicated Resident 7 needed assistance with transferring and toileting, was cognitively intact, and incontinent of bowel and bladder. An activities of daily living (ADL) care plan, revised 3/18/2025, indicated Resident 7 needed assistance with activities of daily living with an intervention to provide Resident 7 with toileting routinely. During an interview and observation on 5/5/2025 at 1:10 p.m., Resident 7 indicated she had to wait a long time, up to two hours, to get assistance after putting on her call light. The last time this happened was during the last week, and it was worse in the evening after supper. Due to the waiting times, she stated she had to sit in urine for a long time and it makes me [Resident 7] feel disgusting and humiliated. Resident 7's room was noted to smell of urine. Resident 7 stated she had accidents, and they do not clean her room on the weekends so it…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-08 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
2. The clinical record for Resident 21 was reviewed on 5/6/2025 at 11:45 a.m. The medical diagnoses included schizophrenia and chronic kidney disease. A Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 3/11/2025, indicated Resident 21 was cognitively intact. A nursing assessment, dated 3/11/2025, indicated Resident 21 was not at risk for developing a pressure area. A skin care plan, revised 3/21/2025, indicated Resident 21 was at risk for skin breakdown and to utilize a pressure-reducing cushion while in the wheelchair. During an interview and observation, on 5/5/2025 at 12:53 p.m., Resident 21 was noted to be sitting in his wheelchair. Midway through the interview, Resident 21 stood up and transferred to bed. Resident 21's wheelchair was noted to have a cushion in place. Resident 21 indicated he had never used a cushion in his wheelchair. During an interview and observation, on 5/6/2025 at 1:09 p.m., Resident 21's wheelchair was noted to be without a cushion. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 5/7/2025 at 12:32 p.m., she indicated Resident 21's cushion was in the second…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-08 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide incontinent care in a timely manner for a resident dependent on staff for toileting needs for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). (Resident 22) Findings include: During an interview with Resident 22 on 5/5/25 at 12:48 p.m., she indicated last week or last weekend, she had to wait four hours in an incontinent brief that was wet with urine and had a bowel movement in it. The resident turned her call light on at 10:00 a.m., and they did not change her until 2:00 p.m. The roommate (Resident 17) indicated she was present when this happened and witnessed it. Resident 22 indicated she reported it to Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 6 and Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) 7 and various other nursing staff. The resident had a clock in her room with the correct time and indicated she had timed it the day it happened. The resident indicated her bottom was raw from laying in a dirty incontinent brief that long. During an observation on 5/7/25 at 11:45 a.m., CNA 3 and CNA 4 provided incontinent…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow policy for a resident who utilized an electronic cigarette and was on oxygen for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for accidents. (Resident 11) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 11 was reviewed on 5/6/25 at 10:02 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, epilepsy, and schizoaffective disorder. The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated Resident 11 was cognitively intact for daily decision making and was dependent on laying to sitting up in bed. During an observation and interview with Resident 11 on 5/5/25 at 10:46 a.m., Resident 11 was sitting up in bed with oxygen on and using an electronic cigarette. During an interview with Resident 11 on 5/6/25 at 11:10 a.m., she indicated she did use their electronic cigarette while on oxygen. Resident 11 indicated she had been told by some staff it was okay to use the electronic cigarette while on oxygen, and then some staff have said it was not okay. Resident 11 indicated that 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 · Fcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure there was Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 14 of 31 days reviewed. This had the potential to affect 27 residents. Findings include: Review of the schedule and RN time sheets from 3/1/2024 to 4/1/2024, indicated that eight hours of RN coverage were not completed on 3/6/2024, 3/7/2024, 3/8/2024, 3/9/2024, 3/10/2024, 3/16/2024, 3/17/2024, 3/24/2024, 3/25/2024, 3/26/2024, 3/27/2024, 3/28/2024, 3/30/2024, and 3/31/2024. An interview with the Director of Nursing on 4/4/2024 at 11:25 a.m. verified that eight hours of RN coverage was not provided on the 14 aforementioned dates. An interview with the Director of Nursing on 4/4/2024 at 11:35 a.m. indicated that there was no specific policy to RN coverage, but the facility would follow the federal regulation of RN coverage of at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement care plans for the utilization of oxybutynin and NicoDerm for Resident 7, dementia medication for Resident 13, and iron, Jardiance, and omeprazole for Resident 14. This affected 3 of 5 residents reviewed for medication management. Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident 7 was reviewed on 4/4/2024 at 11:45 a.m. The medical diagnosis included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 3/6/2024, for Resident 7 indicated she was cognitively intact. A physician order, dated 2/29/2024, indicated for Resident 7 to utilize Ditropan 5 milligrams (mg) daily. A physician order, started on 3/7/2024 and discontinued on 4/4/2024, indicated for Resident 7 to utilize a NicoDerm transdermal patch daily. No care plans were developed and implemented to address the utilization of the aforementioned medications for Resident 7. 2. The clinical record for Resident 13 was reviewed on 4/3/202 at 1:30 p.m. The medical diagnosis included…
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 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 3.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 4.7 | -1.7 vs chain |
The other 89 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.9★, per CMS)
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HENRY COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 05/07/2025 |
| CHIES, STEVEN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 03/01/2021 |
| DYNES, SHELDON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2013 |
| JACKSON, BLAKE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 03/01/2021 |
| JACKSON, ETHAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 03/01/2021 |
| JACKSON, MARK | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 03/01/2021 |
| JACKSON, MICHAEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 05/14/2024 |
| JACKSON, WESSLEY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 03/01/2021 |
| JUSTICE, DAVID | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 03/01/2021 |
| KELSEY, DONNA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 07/18/2024 |
| PIDGEON, JOHN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2013 |
| SHORE, MARION | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2013 |
| STITLE, STEPHEN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 03/01/2021 |
| WARE, DEBORAH | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 08/27/2021 |
| WRIGHT, THERESSA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 05/21/2021 |
| RING, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 08/01/2022 |
| AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2021 |
| DICE, MARK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2023 |
| HILTZ, JEFFREY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| RAINS, AMANDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2026 |
| SHANE, ANDREW | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| VAN CAMP, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2023 |
| YOUNG, CATHY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/24/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 35 rows in the source record cover these 23 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 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 83% 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 $644K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in IN
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Indiana Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 155459. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-29, 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.