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

Waters Of New Castle, The

1000 N 16th St, New Castle, IN 47362 · Non profit - Corporation · 66 certified beds · (765) 521-1420 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (765) 521-1420 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (24% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 53% 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1000 N 16th St Ste 250 · (765) 599-3555 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1000 N 16th St · (765) 521-1557 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1712 Broad St · (765) 529-7177 · Call to confirm hours
Park
772 Washington St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 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.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased0.6%11.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.1%5.5%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.5%0.4%0.9%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms90.3%25.2%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury6.7%3.9%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened3.7%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication37.7%23.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.4%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.2%3.6%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control22.7%23.3%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.9%13.6%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.8%79.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission28.0%22.2%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit16.6%10.8%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.841.611.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.851.441.80typical

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

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

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

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

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

52.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 74 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
45.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.40U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.22hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 45.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 31 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 0.40 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 69% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF52.6%CMS range 43.8–63.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.7–15.310.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge45.2%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge41.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge51.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened3.9%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.5%CMS range 3.5–12.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.181.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.62
RN hours/ resident / day
0.68
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.96
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.26
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.50
RN hoursweekends
24.5%
Total nursing turnover
0.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 66 beds and averages 58.5 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.26 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.96 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.88 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.42 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.50 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 24% is below 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-16)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-12-19)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Actual harm · G2026-04-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to transfer a resident with a mechanical lift in a safe manner resulting in the resident sustaining a laceration to the forehead requiring 5 stitches and an acute fracture above the knee for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident D). Finding include:Review of the record of Resident D on 4/13/26 at 12:00 p.m., indicated the resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to; dated 2/13/26, acquired absence of left leg below the knee amputation; dated 3/27/26, laceration to the forehead requiring 5 stitches; and dated 4/6/26, an acute comminuted angulated fracture involving the distal femoral metaphysis of the left leg acute fracture above the left knee (above the knee fractured bone caused by trauma) and end stage renal disease requiring dialysis (a procedure to remove waste and excess fluid from the blood). The plan of care for Resident D, dated 1/8/2026, indicated the resident had been determined to require a mechanical lift (a mechanical, hydraulic, or electric patient lifting device used to…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-17 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    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 residents were free from a significant medication error when Resident B and Resident C received each others evening medications for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for medication error (Resident B and Resident D). Finding include: 1.Review of the record of Resident B, on 2/17/26 at 10:45 a.m., indicated the resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, diabetes, major depression disorder, chronic kidney disease (Kidneys are damaged and unable to efficiently filter waste and excess fluid from the blood) and peripheral vascular disease (circulation disorder involving narrowing or blockage of blood vessels).The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident B, dated 1/20/26, indicated the resident was cognitively intact for daily decision making. The physician's medication orders for Resident B, on 1/25/26, indicated the resident was prescribed the following medications at bedtime: carvedilol (blood pressure medication) 25 mg, fenofibrate (cholesterol medication) 145 mg, gabapentin (treatment…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-16 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' call lights were with in reach for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for accommodation of needs (Resident 14 and Resident 69). Findings include:1.During an observation on 1/13/2026 11:01 a.m., Resident 14 was sitting in her room in a geriatric chair, the resident's touch pad call light was hanging on the wall behind her bed, not within reach of the resident. The roommates call light was activated. During an interview with the Staffing Coordinator on 1/13/26 at 11:15 a.m., the Staffing Coordinator indicated whoever brought Resident 14 back to her room was responsible to provide her with her call light. The Staffing Coordinator provided Resident 14 with her touch pad call light. Review of the clinical record of Resident 14 on 1/16/26 at 11:15 a.m., indicated the resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic heart failure, lack of coordination, unsteadiness on feet, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, major depressive disorder and osteoarthritis. The care plan for Resident 14, dated…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow a physician's order for humidified oxygen for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Resident 13) Findings include:The clinical record for Resident 13 was reviewed on 01/14/2026 at 10:31 a.m. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), mild intermittent asthma, and anxiety.The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/2/26, indicated Resident 13 was cognitively intact.During an observation and interview with Resident 13 on 1/13/26 at 11:13 a.m., the resident indicated they were on oxygen at home. Oxygen was on the resident at 1 L/min (liter per minute) with no humidified oxygen hooked up to the oxygen tank.Resident 13 had a physician's order, dated 1/7/26, that indicated O2 (oxygen) at 1 to 2 L/min (liters per minute) via nasal cannula as needed for shortness of breath and to change the humidifier bottle once weekly, on Tuesday, during the day shift and as needed.The January 2026 Medication Administration Record (MAR)…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a newly admitted resident had his pain medication available as ordered by the physician for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for pain (Resident 66). Finding include:During an interview with Resident 66 on 1/13/2026 at 11:44 a.m., the resident indicated he had been without his tramadol pain medication since he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The nurses told him that it had something to do with the prescription not being signed. The resident indicated his pain level had been a 3 out of a 1 to 10 pain scare (one being no pain and 10 being the worst pain). The resident indicated his left hip was sore because he had broke it and had surgery. During an observation and interview with Resident 66 on 1/14/2026 at 1:01 p.m., the resident indicated he had been requesting his tramadol pain medication every day since admission because he needed to help him walk with his walker. The resident indicated not having his tramadol pain medication…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
    Ensure 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 monitor valproic acid levels for a resident with a diagnosis of seizures and receiving Divalproex Sodium for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 5) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 5 was reviewed on 1/14/2026 at 11:10 a.m. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, epilepsy (chronic brain disorder causing recurring seizures), muscle weakness, and chronic kidney disease.The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 9/20/25, indicated Resident 5 was moderately cognitively impaired for daily decision making, had seizure disorder, and received anticonvulsants.During a review of Resident 5's current medication orders on 1/15/26 at 10:51 a.m., Resident 5 was ordered Divalproex Sodium Oral Tablet Delayed Release 500 MG (Divalproex Sodium), staff were to administer 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for seizure with a start date of 11/10/25.Resident 5's Electronic Health Record (EHR) indicated no valproic acid levels were drawn or monitored since January 2025.A…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-01 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately code two Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments related to an antipsychotic medication for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for suicidal attempts. (Resident B) Findings include: The clinical record of Resident B was reviewed on 5-1-24 at 9:52 a.m. His diagnoses included, but were not limited to, anxiety, depression, nightmare disorder and suicidal ideation. His most recent MDS assessment, a quarterly assessment dated [DATE], indicated he received antipsychotic medications in Section N0415A, related to medications ordered for the resident. However in Section N0450A, the MDS assessment was coded to reflect he did not receive antipsychotic medications, thus negating the use of a gradual drug reduction information for the use of this type of medication. In the prior MDS, an annual assessment, dated 11-17-23, this information was identified in the same manner. In an interview with the MDS Coordinator on 5-1-24 at 11:34 a.m., she indicated it appeared as if…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-29 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide fresh ice water for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hydration (Resident 4). Finding include: During an observation and interview on 9/27/23 at 1:52 p.m., Resident 4 indicated she had to ask if she wanted ice water, she hasn't gotten fresh ice water since last night. The facility staff were observed passing out fresh ice water and went by Resident 4's room without providing fresh water. During an observation on 9/27/23 at 2:40 p.m., Resident 4 continues to have a half cup of warm water. The resident indicated her and her roommate had not received fresh water since last night. During an observation on 9/28/23 at 9:45 a.m., Resident 4 continues with the same half cup of warm water with no fresh ice water available. During an observation on 9/28/23 at 11:00 a.m., Resident 4 continues with a cup of warm water with no fresh ice water available. Resident 4 was laying in bed with her eyes closed. During an interview and observation on 9/28/23 at 1:42 p.m., Resident 4 had two cups of warm water. The resident…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-29 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    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 privacy curtain was wide enough to provide full visual privacy. This affected 1 of 1 resident reviewed. (Resident 32) Findings include: On 9/27/23, at 11:11 a.m., Resident 32's curtain, between her bed and her roommate's bed, was observed and did not extend from the wall at the head of her bed to the wall past the foot of her bed. The area from the foot of her bed to the wall past the foot of her bed was left exposed for approximately 4 feet. The track on the ceiling, that the curtain was hung from, extended from the wall at the head of her bed to the wall that went past the foot of her bed. There were 10 empty curtain hooks in the curtain track. Resident 32 indicated that anyone could see her in her bed if they walked into her room because the curtain didn't go down far enough. On 9/28/23, at 2:45 p.m., Resident 32 was in bed, with her eyes closed, and the curtain between the beds was not wide enough to extend from wall to wall for privacy. Resident 32's record was reviewed, on 9/28/23,…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-29 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record reviewed, the facility failed to accurate code six-month prognosis and hospice services (Resident 12) and medications (Resident 16) for 2 of residents reviewed for Minimum Data Set (MDS) accuracy. Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident 12 was reviewed on 9/29/2023 at 11:05 a.m. The medical diagnosis included respiratory failure with hypoxia. A Quarterly MDS assessment, dated got 6/28/2023, indicated that Resident 12 did not have a six-month or less prognosis and did not receive hospice services. A Quarterly MDS assessment, dated for 9/28/2023, indicated that Resident 12 did not have a six-month or less prognosis. A physician order, dated 5/6/2021, indicated Resident 12 received hospice services. A hospice recertification, dated 3/19/2023, indicated Resident 12 has a six month or less prognosis if disease runs its normal course and was recertified for hospice services. 2. The clinical record for Resident 16 was reviewed on 9/29/2023 at 10:55 a.m. The medical diagnosis included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A Quarterly MDS…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-29 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop a plan of care for a resident with recurrent Urinary Tract Infections (UTI) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for UTI (Resident 4). Finding include: Review of the record of Resident 4 on 9/28/23 at 10:28 a.m., indicated the resident's diagnosis included, but were not limited to, chronic Urinary Tract Infection (UTI). The physician order for Resident 4, dated 7/21/23, indicated the resident was ordered to be seen by the urologist for recurrent UTI's. The physician order for Resident 4, dated 8/16/23, indicated the resident was ordered keflex (antibiotic) 250 milligrams (mg) indefinitely for recurrent UTI's. The urology report for Resident 4, dated 9/18/23, indicated the resident was being seen for recurrent UTI's. During an interview with Resident 4 on 9/28/23 at 1:42 p.m., indicated she had a long history of UTI's. During an interview with the Director Of Nursing (DON) on 9/28/23 at 2:20 p.m., verified Resident 4 did not have a plan of care in place for UTI's. The DON indicated it was the responsibility of the Minimum…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-29 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to assess and monitor bilateral feet edema (swelling) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for edema (Resident 4). Finding include: During an observation on 9/27/23 at 2:01 p.m., Resident 4 was sitting in a chair, her bilateral feet were swollen. During an observation and interview with Resident 4 on 9/28/23 at 1:42 p.m., the resident was laying in bed, her bilateral feet were swollen. The resident indicated her feet did swell often. The resident indicated nursing had not assessed her feet edema. Review of the record of Resident 4 on 9/28/23 at 10:28 a.m., indicated the resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, age related physical debility, osteoarthritis, pain in right/left knee atrial fibrillation, hypertension, urinary tract infection, gout, anxiety and major depressive disorder. The plan of care for Resident 4, dated 10/18/22, indicated the resident was at risk for dehydration related to diuretic medication use. The intervention included, but were not limited to, observe for increased signs of edema 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to INFINITY HEALTHCARE CONSULTING — 69 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 52.0+1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.1+0.9 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 51.5+0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.7+0.3 vs chain
The other 68 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, per CMS)
1 of 5Alpha Home - A Waters CommunityIndianapolis, IN 1 of 5Belhaven Nursing & Rehab CenterChicago, IL 1 of 5Continental Nursing & Rehab CenterChicago, IL 1 of 5Heritage Place Care & Rehabilitation LLCWinchester, TN 1 of 5Hope Creek Nursing & RehabEast Moline, IL 1 of 5Landmark Of Richton Park Rehab & Nsg CtrRichton Park, IL 1 of 5Landmark at 95th Rehabilitation and Nursing CenterChicago, IL 1 of 5Landmark of Hyde Park Rehabilitation and Nursing CChicago, IL 1 of 5Landmark of Itasca Rehabilitation and Nursing CentItasca, IL 1 of 5Landmark of Lincoln Park Rehabilitation and NursinChicago, IL 1 of 5Landmark of Oak Lawn Rehabilitation and Nursing CeOak Lawn, IL 1 of 5Momence Meadows Nursing & RehabMomence, IL 1 of 5Parker Nursing & Rehab CenterStreator, IL 1 of 5The Waters Of Smyrna, LLCSmyrna, TN 1 of 5The Waters Of Springfield LLCSpringfield, TN 1 of 5Waters Of Clifty Falls, TheMadison, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Covington, TheCovington, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Dillsboro-Ross Manor, TheDillsboro, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Georgetown, TheGeorgetown, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Hobart Skilled Nursing Facility, TheHobart, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Lebanon, TheLebanon, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Martinsville, TheMartinsville, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Memphis A Rehabilitation & Nursing CtrMemphis, TN 1 of 5Waters Of Princeton, ThePrinceton, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Rockport Skilled Nursing Facility, TheRockport, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Scottsburg, TheScottsburg, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Sullivan Nursing Facility, TheSullivan, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Syracuse Skilled Nursing Facility, TheSyracuse, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Tipton Skilled Nursing Facility, TheTipton, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Wabash Skilled Nursing Facility East TheWabash, IN 1 of 5Waters Of Wakarusa Skilled Nursing Facility, TheWakarusa, IN 1 of 5Westpark A Waters CommunityIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Ambassador Nursing & Rehab CenterChicago, IL 2 of 5Midway Neurological / Rehab CenterBridgeview, IL 2 of 5The Waters Of Cheatham, LLCAshland City, TN 2 of 5The Waters Of GallatinGallatin, TN 2 of 5The Waters Of Johnson City, LLCJohnson City, TN 2 of 5Waters Of Batesville, TheBatesville, IN 2 of 5Waters Of Castleton Skilled Nursing Facility, TheIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Waters Of Dunkirk Skilled Nursing Facility, TheDunkirk, IN

Showing 40 of 68; 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
HENRY COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITALOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 10/01/2020
ALCORN, KARIIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/01/2020
DYNES, SHELDONIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2020
FRENCH, BENJAMINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2020
PIDGEON, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2020
SHORE, MARIONIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2020
JANSSEN, PAULIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/01/2020
THE WATERS OF NEW CASTLE IIOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2020

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.

$7.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-69.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$6.6M
Related-party expense53% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 69%Medicare 14%Other / private 17%

This home reported $6.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 53% 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

$605per resident / day
operating cost
$18,387per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$357per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in IN

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 155304. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-16, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next