Milton Home, The
206 E Marion St, South Bend, IN 46601 · Non profit - Corporation · 34 certified beds · (574) 233-0165 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- 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 Dec 2023
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 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 | 15.2% | 11.0% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 15.6% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| 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 | 0.0% | 1.1% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 11.5% | 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 | 1.1% | 3.9% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 28.4% | 23.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.4% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.7% | 3.6% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 30.1% | 23.3% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.3% | 13.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.11 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 7% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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 34 beds and averages 28.8 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 4.44 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.02 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.25 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.72 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.73 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.20 to 0.58 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% 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.
15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-05 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide ongoing Pre and Post Dialysis Evaluations for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for Dialysis management. (Resident 1) Findings include: Resident 1's record was reviewed on 01/05/2026 10:16 AM. Diagnoses on Resident 1's profile included, but were not limited to, end stage renal disease on dialysis, implants and grafts, lower left leg amputation, gastrostomy status, and type II diabetes mellitus. Physician's orders, dated 09/11/2025, included, but were not limited to: a. Check permacath (A permanent catheter, often called a permacath, is a long-term, tunneled tube used for dialysis or urinary drainage, placed under the skin into a large vein or directly into the bladder) site daily upon return from dialysis: Check right chest every evening shift includes caps in place and tight, dressing dry and intact.b. 09/08/2025-No blood pressure or lab draw from either arm with dialysis site, blood pressure to be taken per thigh every shift.c. 12/11/2025- Dialysis: Check access site for bruit and thrill, record/report…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-05 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident medications were secured for 1 of 1 resident room reviewed for unsecured medications. Finding included:During an interview, on 12/30/2025 at 11:32 A.M., Resident 21 indicated she had been administered some Tylenol and some Tramadol several days ago, during the evening shift, by a Qualified Medical Assistant (QMA). Resident 21 indicated the QMA had not witnessed her swallowing these pills, so the resident had put them away in case I needed to show someone. Resident 21 was observed to remove 2 round, white pills within a plastic medicine cup from her closet. One pill had an imprint of AN 627 and the other pill had PH 020 imprinted on it.During an interview on 12/30/2025 at 11:38 A.M. the Regional Corporate Nurse Consultant indicated the pills should not have been unsecured in a resident's room.The clinical record of Resident 21 was reviewed on 12/31/2025 at 11:13 A.M. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to: metabolic encephalopathy, acute and chronic respiratory failure,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-07 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's wheelchair was correctly secured in the facility van during transportation for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident B) This deficient practice resulted in the resident's wheelchair tipping during transportation requiring an evaluation by an acute care center emergency room and treatment for a skin tear to the elbow and an abrasion to the head.Finding includes:Review of a Nursing Progress Note, dated 10/27/2025 at 5:05 P.M., indicated Resident B had fallen over in his wheelchair while being transported from a medical appointment on the facility bus. The note indicated the Emergency Medical Staff had transported Resident B to a local emergency room where he had treated for minor injuries incurred during the accident and was admitted for an unrelated medical condition.Review of a Narrative Nursing Note from the local emergency department indicated the resident had an abrasion to the right side of his head and a skin tear to his right elbow related to his wheelchair falling over…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-10-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to prepare food under sanitary conditions related to a dirty range and oven in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed. This had the potential to affect 24 of the 24 residents who received their meals from the kitchen. Findings include: 1. During the initial kitchen tour on 10/10/2024 at 11:00 A.M. with the Dietary Director (DD), the gas range had four burners with a black substance on all of the grates. The single door oven had a build up of grease and a black substance on the inside. 2. During the final kitchen tour on 10/15/2024 at 9:30 A.M., the range had four burners with a black substance on all the grates and below the grates. The single door oven had a build up of grease and a black substance on the inside. During an interview on 10/15/2024 at 9:31 A.M., the DD indicated the range and the oven were dirty and should be cleaned. The facility used a daily cleaning schedule to complete the kitchen cleaning tasks. On 10/15/2024 at 11:00 A.M., the DD provided a cleaning schedule titled, [Facility Name] Daily Cleaning Schedule…
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 · D2024-10-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan regarding refusal of showers for 1 of 16 residents whose care plans were reviewed. (Resident 16) Finding includes: A record review was completed on 10/10/2024 at 1:45 P.M. for Resident 16. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: type 2 diabetes mellitus, vascular dementia, and adjustment disorder with depressed mood. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 8/23/2024, indicated Resident 16's cognition was intact. During an interview on 10/11/2024 at 10:06 A.M., CNA 6 indicated showers were charted in the Point of Care (POC) under the showering task. She indicated when a resident refused a shower, it was charted in the POC as refused. She indicated they notified the nurse about the resident's refusal and they also filled out a shower sheet and marked refused. A review of Resident 16's shower sheets was completed on 10/11/2024 at 11:03 A.M. The shower sheets indicated the resident refused showers on 9/16/2024, 9/19/2024, 9/23/2024, 9/26/2024, 10/3/2024, 10/7/2024 and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-18 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure care plan conferences were completed every quarter for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for care plan conferences. (Resident 16) Finding includes: During an interview on 10/9/2024 at 2:50 P.M., Resident 16 indicated he had never been to a care plan conference since being admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 10/10/2024 at 1:44 P.M., a record review was completed for Resident 16. The record lacked documentation that a care plan conference had been completed for the 2024 year. During an interview on 10/15/2024 at 9:34 A.M., the Social Services Director indicated Resident 16 attended a care plan conference on 12/19/2023, 6/6/2024 and 8/29/2024. She indicated the resident did not have a care plan conference in February or March of 2024 but should have had one completed. On 10/15/2024 at 10:40 A.M., a policy regarding care plan conferences was requested but one was not provided prior to the survey exit. 3.1-35(e)
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-18 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 was provided 1:1 activities per the plan of care for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for activities. (Resident 6) Finding includes: During an observation on 10/10/2024 at 9:56 A.M., Resident 6 was sitting on her sofa folding a small blanket. During an interview on 10/10/2024 at 2:47 P.M., Resident 6 was sitting on the sofa in her room and indicated she liked to color and did not know what kind of activities the facility offered. During an observation on 10/11/2024 at 10:30 A.M., Resident 6 was sitting on the sofa looking through a coloring book. During an observation on 10/11/2024 at 1:00 P.M., Resident 6 was sitting on her sofa folding a shirt. During an observation on 10/15/2024 at 9:31 A.M., Resident 6 was sitting on her sofa with her eyes closed. A record review was completed on 10/11/2024 at 10:03 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: Parkinson's Disease with dyskinesia, with fluctuations, dysphagia, oropharyngeal phase and Alzheimer's Disease. A current Care Plan, initiated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-18 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to adequately label an over the counter medication stored in a medication cart for 1 of 1 medication cart reviewed. (First Floor Medication Cart) The facility also failed to monitor and maintain proper temperatures of a refrigerator where medications were stored for 1 of 2 medication refrigerators reviewed. (First Floor Medication Refrigerator) Findings include: 1. During an observation of the first floor medication cart on 10/9/2024 at 1:25 P.M. with LPN 8, an opened bottle of Women 50+ Complete Multivitamin with no resident identifying information was in a drawer. An interview with LPN 8 was completed on 10/9/2024 at 1:27 P.M. LPN 8 indicated she did not know whose medication the Women 50+ Complete Multivitamin was, but the medication should be labeled with the resident's name. An interview with the Unit Manager (UM) was completed on 10/9/2024 at 1:30 P.M. The UM indicated all medication should have a label with the resident's name, date of birth , Physician's name, and dosing information. 2. During an…
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 · D2024-10-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to distribute medication in a sanitary manner during 2 of 4 medication administration observations. (RN 2 & RN 3) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 10/10/2024 at 9:45 A.M., RN 2 dropped one tablet of Vitamin D onto the medication cart. RN 4 applied hand sanitizer and gloves and then picked up the tablet of Vitamin D and put it into the medication cup with other medications. The resident was given the medication cup and took all the medications. During an interview on 10/10/2024 at 9:47, RN 2 indicated the medication should have been discarded and replaced with a new tablet. 2. During an observation on 10/11/2024 at 8:49 A.M., RN 3 dropped one tablet of Lisinopril onto the medication cart and used a spoon to pick up the tablet and put it into the medication cup. The resident was given the medication cup and took all the medications. During an interview on 10/11/2024 at 8:53 A.M., RN 3 indicated she did not know if the tablet of Lisinopril should have been discarded after it fell onto the 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-14 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 6 residents reviewed were free from abuse. (Resident C) Finding includes: A self-report incident #196, dated 11/27/23 at 8:30 A.M., indicated Resident C had stated a CNA was rough with her care. The incident indicated CNA 3 was suspended pending the investigation. The resident had received no psychosocial distress. The follow-up, dated 11/30/23, indicated during the investigation it was discovered CNA 3 had a pattern of customer service concerns. The CNA was educated and disciplinary action was taken. A Grievance Form, dated 11/24/23 at 6:10 A.M., and completed by CNA 2 indicated .I walked in room with stuff getting my rooms ready and [name of Resident C] says Hey I said good morning how are you doing she better now you are hear I said whats the matter she said .girl almost toss me out of bed she is real mean. I said you want me to write a grivance she said yes This form did not indicate who the CNA had been, but indicated the CNA had been suspended, pending investigation, on 11/24/23. A typed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 5 citations
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-14 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an incident of abuse, involving Resident C, was reported timely. Finding includes: A self-report incident #196, dated 11/27/23 at 8:30 A.M., indicated Resident C had stated a CNA was rough with her care. The incident indicated CNA 3 was suspended pending the investigation and the resident had received no psychosocial distress. A typed statement from Resident C, dated 11/24/23 indicated .The CNA from night shift almost threw me out of the bed when she was changing me this morning. I had to grab the bar to keep from falling on the floor .She is always rude to me and always mean. I feel safe now but not when she is here During an interview, on 12/14/23 at 11:10 A.M., CNA 2 indicated she had wrote out a grievance form regarding Resident C and how she was treated by CNA 3. She indicated she gave the completed form to the nurse on the night shift, as the day shift nurse wasn't in the facility yet. She indicated she was instructed to call the Administrator, who no longer worked at the facility, which she did and reported…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-10-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store and dispose expired foods for 1 of 1 dietary area observed. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 30 residents of 30 residents who received their meals in the dietary area. Findings include: During an observation on 10/23/2023 at 10:08 A.M., the upright refrigerator had 2 cartons of half and half with an expiration date of 10/9/2023. On 10/23/2023 at 10:15 A.M., the dry storage areas had an opened bag of flour that was not secured with a covering and loose flour was exposed. During an interview on 10/23/2023 at 10:15 A.M., the Dietary District Manager indicated the flour should have been taken to the kitchen and stored in a closed container. On 10/23/2023 at 10:19 A.M., three bags of soft tortilla shells were observed in a cabinet with a best by date of 8/29/2023. During an interview on 10/23/2023 at 10:19 A.M., the Dietary District Manager thought the tortillas may have been stored in the freezer, but was unsure when the tortillas had been pulled from the freezer. On 10/23/2023 at 10:20 A.M., a two-pound…
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 · D2023-10-30 · tag F0568 — isolatedProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide quarterly statements to 3 of 9 residents with resident trust funds. (Residents 10, 20 and 13) Finding includes: The clinical record for Resident 10 was reviewed on 10/23/2023 at 2:00 P.M. The most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment for Resident 10, conducted as a quarterly review on 9/20/2023 indicated she was alert and oriented and cognitively intact. The clinical record for Resident 20 was reviewed on 10/7/23 . The most recent MDS assessment for Resident 20, conducted for an admission assessment indicated he scored a 12 out of 15 possible points and was moderately cognitively impaired. The clinical record for Resident 13 was reviewed on 10/26/2023 at 3:00 P.M. The most recent MDS assessment, completed on 8/20/2023 due to a significant change in condition, indicated the resident was alert and oriented and cognitively intact. During a review of the resident trust fund accounting, on 10/26/23 at 1:54 P.M. with the business office manager BOM, he indicated if the facility was the representative…
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 · D2023-10-30 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a SNF-ABN (Skilled Nursing Facility-Advanced Beneficiary Notice) Form was provided following the end of Medicare skilled services for 1 of 1 resident who discharged from Medicare services and remained in the facility. (Resident 55) Finding includes: On 10/26/2023 at 1:37 P.M., the SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility) Beneficiary Protection Notification Review Forms were reviewed. The form indicated Resident 55 was not issued an SNF-ABN form. Resident 55's representative was provided a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) Form which indicated Resident 55's Medicare coverage would end on 4/23/2023. The form indicated that the representative was notified that their financial liability would begin on 4/24/2023. On 10/26/2023 at 2:16 P.M., the Social Service Director indicated that Resident 55 should have received an SNF-ABN form since she remained in the facility after discharge from Medicare services. On 10/27/2023 at 9:05A.M., the Director of Nursing provided the current policy titled, Advanced Beneficiary Notices. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-30 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was served at a palatable temperature for 3 of 15 residents reviewed. (Residents 10, 17 and 20) Findings include: During an interview with alert and oriented Resident 10, on 10/23/2023 at 3:10 P.M., she indicated her food was often served cold and did not taste good. During an interview with Resident 10, on 10/27/2023 at 2:12 P.M., she indicated her lunch food was bland and was barely warm. During an interview with alert and oriented Resident 17, on 10/23/2023 at 2:19 P.M., she indicated the food was not always served hot. She indicated she used to have the staff heat the food up in the microwave but they had removed the microwave from the second floor dining room due to safety concerns. Resident 17 was discharged from the facility on 10/27/2023. During an interview with Resident 20, on 10/24/2023 at 10:24 A.M., he indicated the food was sometimes served cold. During an interview with Resident 20, on 10/27/23 at 2:16 P.M., he indicated his lunch was not very good and was kind of cold. He indicated…
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 STERLING HEALTHCARE — 5 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 | 3.2 | +1.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.2 | +1.8 vs chain |
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| FRAZIER, JONATHAN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 09/12/2016 |
| LOY, KATHLEEN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 02/18/2016 |
| BARRY, CAITLIN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 11/30/2020 |
| MALOTT, GREGG | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/01/2016 |
| MILTON HOME NURSING HOME AND REHABILITATION | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/01/2016 |
| PULASKI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/01/2016 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 6 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.
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.
This home reported $774K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in IN
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Indiana Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 155738. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-05, 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.