Cardinal Nursing And Rehabilitation Center
1121 E Lasalle Ave, South Bend, IN 46617 · For profit - Corporation · 144 certified beds · (574) 287-6501 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jun 2023
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 3.7% | 11.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.3% | 5.5% | 5.4% | typical |
| 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 | 0.5% | 1.1% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.3% | 25.2% | 6.5% | better 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 | 2.2% | 3.9% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.0% | 11.9% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 28.9% | 23.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.4% | 95.4% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.6% | 3.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.6% | 23.3% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 3.4% | 13.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 78.6% | 79.0% | 79.4% | typical |
‡ 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 30% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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 144 beds and averages 67.2 residents a day — about 47% occupied, or roughly 77 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.35 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.01 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 2.63 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.64 on weekdays — 28% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to store and prepare food in a sanitary manner in 1 of 1 kitchens and 1 of 2 nourishment pantries. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 58 residents who food from the kitchen and/or pantry. Finding includes: During a tour of the kitchen with [NAME] 2 on 6/9/24 at 9:02 A.M., the following was observed: -Uncovered coffee filters were stored on the lower shelf of a table right next to a trash can for the hand washing sink. -Dead bugs and dirt were noted in the light fixtures in the dry storage area and in the food prep areas of the kitchen. -Metal wire racks in the dry storage area were dusty and had rust and grime on them. -A fan and filter in the walk-in refrigerator were black with dust and dirt. -The knife storage rack was grimy and dusty. -Walls in the food preparation area were dirty with a build up of brown and black grime. During an interview on 6/11/24 at 9:17 A.M., the Dietary Supervisor indicated maintenance was working on replacing the light fixtures covers. She agreed the walls and the knife storage unit…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-13 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 maintain the cleanliness of resident's personal refrigerators, for 2 of 3 personal refrigerators that were observed. (Resident 42 & 24) Findings include: 1. An observation of Resident 42's refrigerator was completed on 6/10/2024 at 9:13 A.M and on 6/11/2024 at 11: 16 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON). The following was observed: - 7 undated peanut butter and jelly sandwiches without expiration dates - A dark brown, sticky solution covering the bottom of the refrigerator - A heavy amount of ice build-up on freezer compartment During an interview on 6/10/2024 at 9:14 A.M., Resident 42 indicated he used his refrigerator for snacks and drinks. 2. An observation of Resident 24's refrigerator was completed on 6/10/2024 at 10:30 A.M and on 6/11/2024 at 11: 16 A.M. with the DON. The following was observed: - A foul odor was detected when the refrigerator door was opened - A small, clear container labeled ground turkey and with an expiration date of 6/4/2024 - 2 opened diet cokes without opened dates - A thick…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-13 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
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 1 of 3 residents reviewed for resident rights and dignity, were treated in a manner that respected the resident's dignity, when the resident was photographed without permission by a facility employee (Resident B). Findings include: On 12/12/23 at 12:30 P.M., Resident B was observed in her room sitting in a wheelchair near the bed. The resident was well groomed and in appropriate casual wear. During an interview at that time, Resident B, stood from the wheelchair and transferred herself to her bed without difficulty. The resident indicated that she and Employee 2 had become close friends and that she felt like a granddaughter to her. She indicated sometime in June or July of 2023; she sent a text to Employee 2 requesting that she bring a bag of popcorn to her room from a facility activity. Resident B indicated she fell asleep in her room before Employee 2 delivered the popcorn and that she later sent her a text that showed Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-09 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to notify the attending physician for a change in condition for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for change in condition. (Resident B) Findings include: During a record review, conducted 11/7/2023 at 10:12 A.M., the 5- day admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated the resident had an intact cognition. She was independent for mobility and self-care. Active diagnoses included but were not limited to: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, anxiety, atrial fibrillation, and cardiac pacemaker. She used oxygen as needed. She took a daily anticoagulant. Physician orders included, but were not limited to: -10/24/2023 Oxygen at l liter per nasal cannula as needed -10/23/2023 Cardizem 180 milligrams (mg) oral once a day -10/20/2023 Eliquis 2.5 mg oral twice a day A care plan problem, dated 10/24/2023, included, but was not limited to: resident is at risk for alteration in cardiac function related to pacemaker. The goal was for the resident to be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-06-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure food items in the freezer were dated/labeled and sealed securely after opening and failed to ensure used by dates on foods. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 62 of 64 residents who received meals out of the kitchen. Findings include: On 6/12/23 at 9:28 A.M., during on observation and kitchen tour with the dietary manager, the following was oberserved: - In the pantry of the main kitchen, graham cracker crumbs were in an open bag with no date on the bag indicating when opened. - In the cooler, an open half gallon of milk and a carton of Half and Half had no open date. - In the freezer, two open tubs of ice cream had no open dates. Italian sausage, pork loin chops, beef cubed patties were found to be undated and unsealed. On 6/15/23 at 12:30 P.M., the Regional Nurse Consultant provided a policy titled, Food Storage, revised 5/23 and indicated the policy was the one currently used by the facility. The policy indicated .frozen foods, should be covered or wrapped tightly, labeled and dated with the date…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-19 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the signed advance directive was updated in the plan of care and physician order for 1 of 25 residents reviewed for advanced directives. (Resident 20) Finding includes: A record review was completed on 6/14/2023 at 2:40 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: cerebral infarction and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage affecting left non-dominant side. A Physician Orders For Scope of Treatment (POST), dated 5/12/2023, indicated do not attempt resuscitation. A Physician Order, dated 4/5/2022, indicated full code. A Care Plan, dated 2/19/2020, indicated resident/legal representative prefers a full code status. During an interview on 6/14/2023 at 10:30 A.M., the Director of Nursing indicated they obtain a code status upon admission, readmission, and revisit during a quarterly care conference. The resient was a do not resuscitate and the order and care plan should have been updated when it was changed. On 6/14/2023 at 10:47 A.M., the Director of Nursing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-19 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a notification of change in Medicare covered services was provided for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Medicare services. (Resident 64) Finding includes: The clinical record for Resident 64 was reviewed on 6/14/2023 at 11:00 A.M. Resident 64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was receiving Medicare Part A Services. Review of the record indicated the resident's last covered Medicare Part A services day was 2/16/2023. The clinical record for Resident 64, reviewed on 6/13/2023 at 1:17 P.M., indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included, but not limited to: hemiparesis and hemiplegia related to subarachnoid hemorrhage, diabetes mellitus, depression, and dysphagia. The resident was receiving Medicare Part A skilled services when she was admitted , and her last covered Medicare day was 2/16/2023. The facility Business office provided documentation that a skilled care ABN (Advanced Beneficiary Notice 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 · D2023-06-19 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to protect a residents right to be free from verbal abuse for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for abuse. (Resident C) Finding includes: Review of a facility reported incident, on 6/11/2023 indicated Resident C reported a staff person to be verbally abusive to her. The report indicated the identified employee was suspended pending an investigation, alert and oriented residents were interviewed to determine any concerns with staff they might have, the identified employee received Customer service education and the progressive discipline policy was followed. Resident C was to be monitored for any psychosocial concerns regarding the event. There was no specific information regarding the event on the facility reported incident. However, review of the incident investigation, provided upon request on 6/14/2023 indicated the following: On 6/8/2023, two activity aides (Employee 15 and 16) had transported Resident C on the facility bus to an outside physician's office for an appointment. During the bus ride to the appointment, Employee 16 had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-19 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
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 showers were provided for 1 out of 3 Residents reviewed for activities of daily living. (Resident 50) Finding includes: During an interview on 6/13/2023 at 9:11 A.M., Resident 50 indicated he preferred to take a shower but does not get one. During an interview on 6/14/2023 at 1:28 P.M., Resident 50 indicated he did not have a shower this week. During an interview on 6/16/2023 at 1:41 P.M., the resident indicated he had not received a shower this week. A record review was completed on 6/15/2023 at 2:00 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: neoplasm of the brain, Diabetes Mellitus, anxiety and depression. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 5/22/2023, indicated physical help in part of bathing activity. A Preference for Customary Routine and Activities, dated 4/11/2023, indicated he would like twice a week shower in the P.M. and that it was very important to him to choose between tub bath, shower, and bed/sponge bath. A Care Plan, dated 4/9/2023, indicated resident required assistance with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-19 · 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, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Activities of daily living assistance was provided for 2 of 4 residents reviewed. (Resident 20 and 53) Findings include: 1. Resident 53 was observed on 6/12/2023, 6/13/2023 and 6/14/2023 dressed in the common areas and/or at an activity. Her hair was observed to be unkept in appearance and greasy. The clinical record for Resident 53, reviewed on 6/19/23 at 9:16 A.M., indicated the resident had diagnoses included but not limited to: hypertension, chronic kidney disease hyperlipidemia, obesity, insomnia, adjustment disorder with depressed mood, dementia, and major depressive disorder, recurrent, The most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment for Resident 53, completed on 5/11/2023 for a quarterly review, indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assist of one for toileting, bathing, dressing, and limited assist of one for personal hygiene. The annual MDS assessment, completed on 4/12/2023, indicated it was very important for the resident to choose between a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure antibiotic medications were administered as directed by the physician's orders and anti- coagulant medication was resumed timely for 1 of 3 residents reviewed. (Resident C) Findings include: The record for Resident C, reviewed on 6/14/2023 at 11:01 A.M., indicated Resident C was admitted with diagnoses included, but not limited to: acute embolism and thrombosis of right lower extremity, thrombocytopenia, repeated falls, muscle weakness, unsteadiness on feet and osteomyelitis of vertebra -cervical and thoracic region. The resident was hospitalized [DATE] - 4/11/2023 for a septic arthritic left hip joint and on 6/8/2023 for an acute deep vein thrombosis. Review of the hospital discharge records for Resident C, completed on 4/11/2023 indicated the resident was to receive enoxaparin (an anticoagulant) .3 ml (mililiter) via subcutaneous injections every 12 hours for 21 days. In addition, the resident was to receive the antibiotic,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-19 · 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, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure respiratory equipment was maintained per professional standards for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Resident 44, 33 and 1 ) Findings include: 1. Resident 44 was observed on 6/12/2023 during the initial tour of the facility, lying in bed, holding his oxygen tubing and nasal cannula in his hands. The resident's oxygen tubing, which was connected to a concentrator was not dated and there was no plastic storage bag observed in the room. On 6/13/23 at 10:07 A.M., Resident 44 was observed seated in his wheelchair with oxygen per a nasal cannula connected to a portable oxygen tank. The tubing was not dated. On 6/16/23 at 9:30 A.M., Resident 44 was observed lying in bed. The resident was not wearing oxygen at the time. The oxygen tubing was hanging off the back of his wheelchair, connected to a portable oxygen tank. There was no storage bag noted and the oxygen tubing was not dated. A record review was completed on 6/16/23 for Resident 44. Diagnoses included, but not limited to: dementia,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that medications were secure and inaccessible to unauthorized staff and residents by 1 of 2 medication carts, 1 of 3 treatment carts. Findings include: 1. During a medication observation, on 6/14/2023, at 8:20 A.M., Qualified Medication Aide (QMA) 8 left the medication cart unlocked while she was in a resident's room. The medication cart was not in view of the QMA. QMA 8 indicated she should have locked the cart before entering the resident's room. 2. During a medication observation, on 6/14/2023 at 2:45 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 9 walked away from the medication cart without locking it. It was not in view of the LPN. LPN 9 indicated he should have locked the medication cart before walking away. 3. On 6/15/2023 at 8:08 A.M., during an observation and interview with QMA 17, the treatment cart was unlocked in the unit's resident lounge with treatment medications and supplies. QMA 17 indicated the cart should be locked. 4. During a medication observation, on 6/15/2023 at 11:56 A.M., Registered Nurse (RN) 11…
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 | 5 of 5 | 3.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 5 of 5 | 3.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.7 | +0.3 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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| HORN, BRENDA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 12/01/2023 |
| BABCOCK, PAUL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/30/2020 |
| AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2023 |
| CORPE, JAMIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/22/2023 |
| DICE, MARK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| VAN CAMP, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| WAITE, ANTOINETTE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/03/2022 |
| WOLFRAM, DONALD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 84% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $757K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in IN
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Indiana Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 155115. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-16, 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.