Waters Of Syracuse Skilled Nursing Facility, The
500 E Pickwick Dr, Syracuse, IN 46567 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 66 certified beds · (574) 457-4401 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (62%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 2 to 1 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 | 2.5% | 11.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.6% | 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 | 1.4% | 1.1% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 54.4% | 25.2% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.5% | 3.9% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.6% | 11.9% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.4% | 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 | 3.2% | 3.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 14.5% | 23.3% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.9% | 13.6% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.8% | 79.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 13.8% | 22.2% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.9% | 10.8% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.48 | 1.61 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.92 | 1.44 | 1.80 | 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.
42.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 44 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 25.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 27 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 21% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 | 42.5%CMS range 32.0–54.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.3%CMS range 8.8–17.4 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 25.9% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 22.2% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 18.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.7%CMS range 4.0–12.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.99 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 66 beds and averages 41.2 residents a day — about 62% occupied, or roughly 25 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.13 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 2.97 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 62% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2026-05-21 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to assess a resident timely for 1 of 3 residents reviewed. This deficient practice resulted in a delay of treatment regarding sending the resident to hospital. The resident required acute medical care and remained in hospital for twenty days. (Resident 31) Finding includes:During an interview on 5/17/2026 at 11:07 A.M., Resident 31 indicated he had been recently hospitalized for sepsis, but could not recall the events that lead to him being sent to the hospital. Resident 31 indicated he woke up in the local Emergency Department and stayed in the hospital for over two weeks. Resident 31's record review was completed on 5/19/2026 at 10:00 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: urinary tract infection, benign prostatic hyperplasia, obstructive and reflux uropathy, stage four chronic kidney disease, type two diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease and congestive heart failure. A Quarterly Minimum Data assessment dated [DATE] 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.
- Actual harm · G2025-01-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement interventions to reduce the risk of falls for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for accidents, (Resident 27 and 247). This deficient practice resulted in a fall requiring hospitalization for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident 247). Findings Include: 1. The record for Resident 247 was completed on 01/08/2025 at 9:40 A.M. Resident 247 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnosis included, but were not limited to subarachnoid hemorrhage, cardiomegaly, falls, insomnia and polyneuropathy. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, completed on 12/18/2024 indicated Resident 247 was moderately cognitively impaired, required moderate/partial assistance for personal hygiene, toileting and transfers and substantial assistance for ambulation more than 10 feet. The resident was marked as having falls in the past 1 - 6 months prior to her admission. A Fall Risk review (assessment), dated 12/14/2024, indicated Resident 247 was…
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 before2026-05-21 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure food was handled properly to prevent foodborne illness for 18 of 38 residents who consumed food being served at mealtime. Findings include:During a dining observation on 5/17/2026 between 11:48 A.M-12:02 P.M., Employees 4, 11, and 16 served a total of 14 cups and/or glasses of beverages and 6 plates of food touching the eating and drinking surfaces of the cups, glasses and plates. In addition, Employee 4's fingers were noted to be touching pudding and masked potatoes while she served food. During an interview with Administrator on 5/21/2026 at 11:05 A.M. he acknowledged that putting employee hands on the eating surface of plates of food was note a a proper way to serve food. During an interview with the Administrator, on 5/21/2026 at 11:10 A.M., a policy was requested from the administrator regarding proper food service techniques, but one was not provided prior the end of the survey. 3.1-21(i)(1) and (3)
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to make a reasonable accommodation for a resident who required a grab bar on his bed for self-transfers for 1 of 8 resident's reviewed. (Resident 32) Finding includes:During an interview on 5/18/2026 at 8:56 A.M. Resident 32 indicated he was unable to get out of bed to use the bathroom by himself because he did not have an enabler bar on his bed. Resident 32 indicated he had been told on two different occasions, by the Maintenance Director (MD), that an enabler bar for the bed had been ordered, but the enabler bar had not yet been installed on his bed. During an interview with the MD on 5/19/2026 at 9:48 A.M., he indicated he had spoken to Resident 32 twice about the enabler bar after the facility had put in an order for the resident to have an enabler bar installed on the Resident 32's bed. The MD indicated Resident 32 was able get out of bed by himself, without the bar, but getting out of bed had caused the resident more pain in his right shoulder. 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 · D2026-05-21 · 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified of elevated blood glucose levels timely for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 36) 1. A Record review for Resident 36 was completed, on 5/19/2026 at 10:11 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: diabetes mellitus type 2, peripheral vascular disease, neuropathy and intellectual disabilities.A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated, 4/20/2026, indicated Resident 36 was cognitively intact and received insulin injection for 7 days of the look back period.A Physician's Order, dated 1/20/2026, indicated Insulin Aspart Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector 100 units/milliliter, inject as per sliding scale: if 0 - 150 = 0 units; 151 - 200 = 2 units; 201 - 250 = 4 units; 251 - 300 = 6 units; 301 - 350 = 8 units; 351 - 400 = 10 units and call doctor; 401 - 450 = 12 units, subcutaneously four times a day for diabetes mellitus.The following blood sugars were recorded without notification to the physician:4/11/2026 at 4:57 P.M. 404 mg/dL (milligrams per…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a gradual dose reductions for psychotropic medications was attempted for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Residents 24) Findings include: 1. A record review for Resident 24 was completed on 5/19/2026 at 9:55 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: anxiety, depressive disorder, and altered mental status. A physician's order initiated on 10/30/2025 for Lorazepam 0.5 mg, give 0.25 mg by mouth two times a day for anxiety. The order had been discontinued on 4/16/2026. A physician's order, dated 4/16/2026 indicated Lorazepam 0.5 mg, give 0.25 mg by mouth two times a day for anxiety had been reordered. A physician's order ,dated 10/07/2025 indicated behavior monitoring every shift for tearful periods, isolation, anxiety, depression. Observe for any new onset and/or worsening side effects with psychotropic drugs common side effects every shift. A review of behavior monitoring reports indicated the resident had exhibited no behaviors from December 14, 2025 through May 20, 2026. A pharmacy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure 11 of 15 nursing staff (Director of Nursing, RN 5, LPNs 6, 7, 9, 10, 12 and 14, QMAs 8, 13 an 15) demonstrated competency related to following medication orders for 1 of 6 residents reviewed. (Resident 31)Finding includes: Resident 31's record review was completed on 5/19/2026 at 10:00 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: urinary tract infection, benign prostatic hyperplasia, obstructive and reflux uropathy, stage four chronic kidney disease, type two diabetes mellitus, hyperthyroidism, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, peripheral vascular disease, hypertension and congestive heart failure. A Quarterly Minimum Data assessment, dated 2/26/2026, indicated Resident 31 had not rejected care, had not had exhibited any behaviors and had intact cognition. A review of Resident 31's February 2026 Medication Administration Record indicated Resident 31 had the following orders:- Give one 25 milligrams (mg) capsule of metoprolol succinate (anti-hypertensive) by mouth one time a day every Tuesday,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-21 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow physician ordered medication monitoring based on physician orders for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Residents 6) Findings include:1. A record review for Resident 6 was completed on 5/18/2026 at 1:00 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: acute on chronic diastolic congestive heart failure and hypertension. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/23/2026, indicated Resident 6 was cognitively intact and received a diuretic.A Physician's Order, dated 4/10/2026, indicated a weekly weight was to be obtained for congestive heart failure and the physician was to be notified of a weekly weight gain of two pounds or more.A review of Resident 6's weights for April 2026 and May 2026, indicated a weight had only been obtained for the weeks including the dates of 4/29/2026, 5/11/2026 and 5/13/2026.During an interview, 5/21/2026 at 10:32 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated Resident 6's weight values should have been documented weekly in the medical record. She…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-21 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure time sensitive medications were dated when opened for 1 of 38 residents (R 25) on 1 of 3 nursing units. (Teal unit) Findings include:During an inspection of the medication cart on the Teal Unit on 5/20/2026 at 9:45 A.M., a bottle of eye drops, for Resident 25, opened had been opened, but did not have an open date on the bottle.During an interview with QMA 3, on 5/20/2026 at 9:52 A.M. she indicated the eye drops should have been dated when they were opened.A policy titled, Medication Storage in the Facility, provided by the administrator on 5/21/2026 at 1:22 P.M. and indicated the policy was the one currently used by the facility. The policy indicated.Outdated drugs will be immediately withdrawn from stock by the facility.A policy for dating medications when opened was requested but one was not provided.16.2 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 3.1-25(k)(6)
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, observation and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program related to flies in a resident's room for 1 of 38 residents reviewed. (Resident 25)Finding includes:During an interview on 5/18/2026 at 10:38 A.M., Resident 25 indicated she had had a fly problem for about a year. Resident 25 indicated staff had been aware of the flies and the facility had had a local pest control company treat her room for drain flies. During an observation on 5/18/2026 at 10:40 A.M., a dozen flies could be seen on the walls of Resident 25's room, and six flies could be seen on the resident's bathroom walls. During a tour of the environment with the Maintenance Director (MD) and Housekeeping Supervisor (HS) on 5/19/2026 at 9:35 A.M., both the MD and HS denied knowledge of any reported issue in Resident 25's room and/or bathroom involving flies. During an interview with Resident 25's family member on 5/19/2026 at 9:38 A.M., the family member indicated Resident 25 had been dealing with drain flies for about a year. She indicated she had bought 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 · Ecited before2025-01-10 · 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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared and served under sanitary conditions related to unsealed and undated items in the freezer/cooler,expired foods in use, and dirty cooking utensils and appliances in the main kitchen. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 44 of 44 residents who received meals out of the kitchen. Findings include: 1. During the initial tour of the kitchen, on 1/6/2025 at 9:25 A.M., with the Dietary Manager the following was observed: - the reach in freezer had dirty seals along the bottom of the freezer and the freezer floor had food debris - the walk-in freezer had a box of sausage links that was not sealed properly - an entire bag of Salisbury steak not sealed. - a bag of biscuits was opened and not sealed - the kitchen floor had stains and food debris. - the walk-in cooler had 2 water containers belonging to staff - there was an opened and undated jar of dill pickles in the walk in cooler. - an opened and undated bag of chicken gravy in the dry storage area. - 4 bags of navy beans…
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 · D2025-01-10 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a dignity cover for a urinary indwelling catheter for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for urinary indwelling catheters. (Resident 34) Finding includes: During an observation, on 1/7/2025 at 1:46 P.M., Resident 34 was lying in her recliner. The urinary drainage tubing was observed over her left thigh and the drainage bag had a white side and a clear side. The urinary collection bag was observed from outside the room, hanging on the wheelchair next to the recliner, without a dignity cover and urine was able to be viewed through the clear side of the bag and was also leaking on the floor. During an observation, on 1/8/2025 at 9:11 A.M., the urinary collection bag was observed hanging from the bed frame without a dignity bag. Urine was visible in the collection bag. During an observation, on 1/8/2025 at 11:24 A.M., Resident 34 was transported via a wheelchair to the therapy room with the urinary drainage bag attached under the resident's wheelchair without a dignity bag. Urine was visible in the collection bag.…
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 22 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-10 · 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 2 of 3 residents who discharged from Medicare services and remained in the facility. (Resident 9 & 14) Finding includes: On 1/8/2025 at 9:07 A.M., the SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility) Beneficiary Protection Notification Review Forms were reviewed. 1. The form indicated Resident 9 was not issued an SNF-ABN form. Resident 9 was provided with a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) Form which indicated Resident 9's Medicare coverage would end on 8/28/2024. An Advanced Beneficiary Notice (ABN) was not provided to Resident 9. During an interview, on 1/9/2025 at 9:52 A.M., the Business Office Manager (BOM) indicated Resident 9 had 34 Medicare A days remaining to use and was provided with a NOMNC which indicated Resident 9 would be discharged from Medicare A services on 8/28/2024. 2. The form indicated Resident G was not issued an SNF-ABN form. Resident G was provided with a 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 · D2025-01-10 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a PASARR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) was completed timely for 1 of 1 residents reviewed. (Resident B) Finding includes: The record for Resident B was reviewed on 1/7/2025 at 11:34 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to fractured ribs, cancer, end stage renal disease, bipolar, and malnutrition. A PASARR Level 1 for Resident B was completed on 6/16/2024. The Level 1 determined Resident B had a serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability and was placed in the Convalescence category - 60 Day Convalescence Care Approval. A 60 day or less stay in the NF (nursing facility) was authorized. The form indicated Re-screening must occur by or before the 60th day if the individual is expected to remain in the NF beyond the authorization timeframe On 1/8/2025 at 1:13 P.M., the Social Service consultant provided a Notice of Level 1 screen outcome. The level 1 screening form indicated it was valid for 60 days with an end date of September 14, 2024. The record for Resident B lacked 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 · D2025-01-10 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure base line care plans were initiated for a resident with falls and receiving dialysis, and a resident at high risk for falls for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for base line care plans. (Resident B & 247) Findings include: 1. The record for Resident B was reviewed on 1/7/2025 at 11:34 A.M. Diagnoses included but were not limited to: fractured ribs, cancer, end stage renal disease, bipolar, repeated falls and malnutrition. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/30/2024 indicated Resident B was receiving dialysis. A Base Line Care Plan form, dated 7/30/2024, indicated the resident required dialysis and had previous falls with injury. The form lacked goals, interventions and any special needs to properly care for the resident. During an interview, on 1/8/2025 at 10:59 A.M., the MDS coordinator indicated the care plan summary should have had goals and interventions. 2. The record for Resident 247 was reviewed on 1/8/2025 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive care plan for 3 of 13 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. (Residents 18, 20 and 32) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 1/6/2024 at 9:53 A.M., Resident 18 had facial hair stubble. He indicated this was the longest his facial hair had been in a while and the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) was to assist him to shave. A record review for Resident 18 was completed on 1/8/2025 at 1:20 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: cerebral infarction (stroke), spinal stenosis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/16/2024, indicated Resident 18 was cognitively intact, required partial/moderate assistance for bed mobility and substantial/maximal assistance for transfers and personal hygiene. A Care Plan for activities of daily living (ADLs) could not be located in the medical record. During an interview, on 1/9/2024 at 10:05 A.M., the MDS (Minimum Data Set) Coordinator indicated a care plan for…
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 · D2025-01-10 · 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 — 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 care plan meetings were held timely for 3 of 25 residents whose care plans were reviewed. (Residents 27, 30 and 38) Findings include: 1. The record for Resident 27 was reviewed on 01/07/2025 at 2:48 P.M. Diagnosis included, but were not limited to arthritis, hypertension, obstructive and reflux uropathy and glaucoma. A Care Plan meeting progress note, dated 4/4/2024, indicated Resident 27's POA (Power of Attorney) was present at the meeting. The record lacked documentation of any care plan meetings having been held after 4/4/2024. During an interview, on 1/8/2025 at 1:23 P.M., the Corporate Social Service Director (SSD) indicated a meeting was held in April and Resident 27 should have had two additional meetings since then, but no meetings have been held since April. 2. During an interview, on 1/6/2025 at 11:02 A.M., Resident 38's Power of Attorney (POA) indicated he had not had any care plan meetings since the initial admission meeting but he…
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 · D2025-01-10 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 interview, the facility failed to ensure an incontinent resident remained free from an indwelling urinary catheter for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for urinary catheters. Finding includes: During an observation, on 1/7/2025 at 1:46 P.M., Resident 34 was lying in her recliner. The urinary drainage tubing was observed over her left thigh and the urinary drainage bag was hung on the wheelchair next to the recliner. A record review for Resident 34 was completed on 1/8/2025 at 10:04 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, kidney failure and history of urinary tract infections. Resident 34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She was discharged on 10/19/2024 and readmitted on [DATE]. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/1/2024, indicated Resident 34 was cognitively intact and was frequently incontinent of bladder. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/9/2025, indicated Resident 34 was…
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 · D2025-01-10 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure nutritional supplements % (percentage) were documented for a resident with weight loss; failed to initiate RD recommendations for supplements for a resident with weight loss and failed to serve the appropriate diet to a resident receiving dialysis for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for nutrition. (Residents 1, 27 and E) Findings include: 1. During an interview, on 1/6/2025 at 10:17 A.M., Resident 1 indicated she had lost maybe another 25 pounds. The record for Resident 1 was reviewed on 1/9/2025 at 8:59 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: diabetes, anxiety, kidney failure, and polyneuropathy. Current Physician Order, dated 12/23/2024, included the following: House shake with meals for Supplement- give 1 container/serving by mouth. Record % consumed. A Care Plan, initiated on 9/16/2024, indicated Resident 1 was at risk for nutritional deficit related to diagnoses of heart disease, diabetes, hypertension and gastro esophageal reflux disease. Weight loss. Interventions included but were not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-10 · 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 interview, the facility failed to properly store oxygen therapy equipment and C-PAP (continuous positive airway pressure) equipment for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for oxygen therapy. (Resident 18 and 20) Findings include: 1. During an observation, on 1/6/2025 at 9:53 P.M. and 1/7/2025 at 10:37 A.M., Resident 18's C-Pap mask was observed on top of his personal refrigerator, unbagged. During an observation, on 1/8/2025 at 1:14 P.M., Resident 18's C-Pap mask was observed on the floor. During an observation, on 1/9/2025 at 11:27 A.M., a CNA came out of the Resident 18's room. The C-Pap mask was observed on top of the personal refrigerator, unbagged. At 1:30 P.M., the C-Pap mask was still on top of the resident's personal refrigerator. A record review for Resident 18 was completed on 1/8/2025 at 1:20 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: cerebral infarction (stroke), congestive heart failure, obstructive sleep apnea and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/16/2024,…
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 · D2025-01-10 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure pain medications were being monitored for effectiveness for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pain management. (Resident 1) Finding includes: During an interview, on 1/06/2025 at 10:18 A.M., Resident 1 indicated If I move, I get pain, I get Tramadol. The record for Resident 1 was reviewed on 1/9/2025 at 8:59 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to diabetes, anxiety, kidney failure and polyneuropathy. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/15/2024, indicated Resident 1 had pain occasionally at a score of 6 (moderate) level and received routine and PRN (as needed) pain medications. A current Care Plan, initiated on 4/19/2023, indicated Resident 1 had the potential for pain/discomfort related to their diagnosis, reduced mobility, diabetes and right shoulder pain. Interventions included, but were not limited to: monitor the effectiveness of pain medications and administer pain medication as per MD orders and note the effectiveness. Current physician orders included, but were not limited to:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-10 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure pre/post dialysis assessments were completed for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for dialysis services. (Resident 20) Finding includes: During an interview, on 1/6/2025 at 2:02 P.M., Resident 20 indicated he had just returned from dialysis. A record review was completed for Resident 20, on 1/7/2025 at 1:05 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: chronic kidney disease stage 4, anemia in chronic kidney disease and acute kidney failure. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/31/2024, indicated Resident 20 had moderate cognitive impairment and received dialysis services. A Physician's Order, dated 12/19/2024, indicated Resident 20 to go to the [company name] dialysis unit on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. A Care Plan indicated Resident 20 was at risk for fluid volume deficit related to rapid fluid removal following dialysis treatment. Interventions included, but were not limited to: observation for hypotension (low blood pressure), hypovolemia (low extracellular fluid in the blood),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-10 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to adjust medication related to laboratory results to ensure the dose was not excessive for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 32) Finding includes: A record review for Resident 32 was completed on 1/7/2025 at 11:18 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: underweight, disorientation, muscle weakness and osteoarthritis. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/18/2024, indicated Resident 32 had moderate cognitive impairment. A Physician's Order, dated 4/19/2024, indicated cholecalciferol 10,000 units daily for vitamin D deficiency. A 25-hydroxyvitamin D laboratory test was obtained on 8/13/2024. The test indicated a vitamin D level greater than 120 ng/mL (nanograms per milliliter). The normal range specified on the test result was 30-100 ng/mL. Nurse Practitioner Progress Notes, dated 8/16/2024, 8/26/24 and 8/30/24, indicated Resident 32 was seen by the nurse practitioner. The notes did not address the elevated 25-hydroxyvitamin D laboratory test results. 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 · D2025-01-10 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to limit the use of an as needed psychotropic medication to 14 days for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 20) Finding includes: A record review was completed for Resident 20 on 1/7/2025 at 1:05 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: major depressive disorder and adjustment disorder with depressed mood. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/31/2024, indicated Resident 20 had moderate cognitive impairment and took an antidepressant. A Physician's Order, dated 12/14/2024, indicated Xanax (antianxiety medication) 0.5 milligrams every 12 hours as needed for anxiety. The Medication Administration Record, dated 12/2024, indicated Resident 20 received Xanax beyond the 14-days on 12/28/2024, 12/29/2024 and 12/31/2024. The Medication Administration Record, dated 1/2025, indicated Resident 20 received Xanax beyond the 14-days on 1/7/2025. A Care Plan, dated 1/3/2025, indicated Resident 20 was at risk for increased anxiousness with the need for anxiolytic 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 · D2025-01-10 · 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, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure nutritive value and flavor was maintained for puree diets for 2 of 2 residents who received a puree diet. Finding includes: During an observation of food preparation for pureed foods, on 1/6/2025 from 11:14 A.M. to 11:36 A.M., the following was observed: The Dietary Manager obtained a bowl of cooked carrots, indicating he was preparing 2 servings. He placed the carrots in the blender and started the blender. He added 1/2 cup of water and resumed blending the carrots and water. He then placed the pureed carrots in a small metal pan and placed it on the steamer table for service. The Dietary Manager indicated he followed the (instruction) sheet that was taped to the inside of a cabinet door. The untitled paper listed the number of servings under the heading portion:#12 scoop for pureed vegetables. The left side of the paper indicated cooked vegetables, 4 oz. spoodle ( green beans, wax beans, carrots, etc.); Chicken Base: teaspoon; Hot water, cups; Thick and Easy Thickener, Tablespoons. For 2 servings of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were carried out appropriately for residents on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for infection control (Residents 30, 247 & 27). Findings include: 1. During an observation of medication administration on 1/9/2025 at 9:41 A.M., Resident 30 had an Enhanced Barrier Precautions sign on their room door and an isolation cart inside their room. RN 6 entered Resident 30's room wearing a pair of gloves. The RN did not have on a gown. RN 6 proceeded to administer medications to the resident via their feeding tube. On 1/7/2025 at 11:23 A.M., a record review was completed for Resident 30. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: dysphagia, malnutrition and cerebral infarction. A review of Resident 30's Physician's Orders indicated Enhanced Barrier Precautions due to internal peg tube device. A Care Plan, initiated on 1/16/2024 indicated Resident 30 was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions due to a newly inserted PEG tube. Interventions included, but were…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-09 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a change in Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage form (NOMNC) was provided timely, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for beneficiary notices. (Resident 90) Finding includes: The record for Resident 90 was reviewed on 2/8/2024 at 8:55 A.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: acute congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation and weakness. The resident was admitted under Medicare part A for rehabilitation. A Social Service Progress Note, dated 11/27/2023, indicated the resident's daughter planned for the resident to discharge back to her previous, unlicensed assisted living facility once she was discharged from therapy services. A Social Service Progress Note, dated 12/6/2023, verified the details for the resident's discharge to her previous residence. Social Services indicated they had sent a referral to a home health agency. A Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage form for Resident 90 indicated the resident's last covered date of therapy services was 12/10/2023. The form was not signed and she went home w [with] HH [home…
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 before2024-02-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement and revise a care plan for 2 out of 15 resident care plans reviewed. (Residents 11 & 17) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 2/7/2024 at 9:45 A.M., Resident 17's continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) mask and tubing was on the floor next to the nightstand. The resident indicated that he used the machine at night when he sleeps. A record review was completed for Resident 17 on 2/5/2024 at 1:45 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obstructive sleep apnea and cerebrovascular disease. There was no Physician's Order for the CPAP machine. There was no Care Plan initiated for the use of the CPAP machine. During an interview on 2/8/2024 at 9:53 A.M. the Director of Nursing indicated Resident 17 should have had a care plan for the CPAP. 2. The record for Resident 11 was reviewed on 2/6/2024 at 1:30 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: fracture of the fourth metacarpal bone in the left hand and contracture of the left hand.…
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 · D2024-02-09 · 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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an individualized activity program was provided, for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for activities. (Residents 21 and 33) Findings include: 1. The record for Resident 21 was reviewed on 2/5/2024 at 2:30 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: major depressive disorder, single episode, dementia with mood disturbance, difficulty walking, glaucoma, and bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The most recent Annual Minimum Data Set assessment, completed on 8/15/2023, indicated it was somewhat important to do things with groups of people, do her favorite activities, have pet visits, go outside when the weather permitted and listen to music she liked. The care plans regarding activities provided a conflicting description of Resident 21's activity needs. The first activity care plan indicated the resident was independent and able to pursue her own leisure , such as watching television, visiting with her son, and reading. The second activity care plan indicated the resident was cognitively impaired 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 · D2024-02-09 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 splint to prevent contracture progression was applied, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for limited range of motion. (Resident 11) Finding includes: The record for Resident 11 was reviewed on 2/6/2024 at 1:30 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: fracture of the fourth metacarpal bone in the left hand and contracture of the left hand. Resident 11 was observed on 2/5/2024 at 10:37 A.M., seated in her wheelchair. The resident was noted to have contracted hands, especially the left hand. During an interview with Resident 11, on 2/5/2024 at 10:38 A.M., she indicated she had broken a finger in her left hand in the past. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, completed on 11/16/2023, indicated Resident 11 was cognitively intact. The current care plans for Resident 11 included a plan to address the resident's contracture of her left hand, with interventions to notify the physician if the contracture worsened, and therapy as needed. There was also a care plan for the resident to complete…
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 before2024-02-09 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had respiratory orders, tubing changes and equipment properly stored when not in use, for 2 of 7 reviewed for respiratory care. (Residents 17 & 20) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 2/7/2024 at 9:45 A.M., Resident 17's continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) mask and tubing was on the floor next to the nightstand. The resident indicated that he used the machine at night when he sleeps. During an observation on 2/7/2024 at 1:37 P.M., the CPAP mask and tubing was lying on floor next to the nightstand. During an observation on 2/8/2023 at 9:33 A.M., the CPAP mask and tubing was lying on top of the machine on the nightstand, uncovered. A record review was completed for Resident 17 on 2/5/2024 at 1:45 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obstructive sleep apnea and cerebrovascular disease. A review of Physician Order's indicated that Resident 17 did not have an order for CPAP use or cleaning/changing of the equipment. A Care Plan…
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 · D2024-02-09 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors related to not following a Physician's Order for Coumadin (warfarin, a blood thinner) therapy, for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 22) Finding includes: A record review for Resident 22 was completed on 2/6/2024 at 12:10 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to: pulmonary embolism and Alzheimer's disease. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/27/2024, indicated Resident 22 received an anticoagulant. A Nurse's Note, dated 1/23/2024 at 3:46 A.M., indicated a lab draw was completed. A PT/INR (prothrombin time/international normalized ratio) blood test, dated 1/23/2024, indicated an INR of 1.8 (therapeutic range 2.0-3.0). The lab report had a handwritten note that indicated to begin warfarin 6 milligrams, and recheck the PT/INR lab on 1/30/2024. A Nurse's Note, dated 1/24/2024 at 4:13 P.M., indicated the Nurse Practitioner was notified of the INR result of 1.8, and an order was received to increase the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-09 · 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, and interview, the facility failed to document the open date of Tubersol (tuberculin skin test serum), and keep lorazepam liquid stored/locked properly in the Pyxis system, for 1 of 1 medication rooms reviewed for storage and labeling. Findings include: 1. On 2/9/2024 at 10:19 A.M., a locked miniature refrigerator was observed, with RN 3, to have a bag of two Tubersol 5 units per 0.1 milliliters vials with one opened and the other vial opened. The open vial did not have an open date written. Another bag of one opened vial of Tubersol received from the pharmacy on 12/6/2023, was not dated with an open date. During an interview on 2/9/2024 at 10:23 A.M., RN 3 indicated Tubersol needed to be used within 28 days of opening, and dated with the date opened. 2. On 2/9/2024 at 10:21 A.M., the unlocked Pyxis system refrigerator was observed with RN 3. Two bottles of lorazepam liquid were observed in an unlocked drawer of the refrigerator. During an interview on 2/9/2024 at 10:27 A.M., RN 3 indicated since the Pyxis system had been installed, the lorazepam had not been…
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 before2024-02-09 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to sanitize a community use blood glucose monitor after use, which had the potential to affect 4 residents who receive blood glucose testing. Finding includes: During an observation of the medication pass on 2/6/2024 at 7:53 A.M., RN 3 was observed to obtain a blood sugar for Resident 6. The blood glucose monitor was taken from the right upper medication cart drawer. No prior sanitation of the monitor was observed. After the blood glucose test was completed, RN 3 was observed placing the blood glucose monitor back into the medication cart without sanitizing the monitor. During an interview on 2/6/2024 at 8:23 A.M., RN 3 indicated she should have sanitized the blood glucose monitor prior to placing the monitor into the medication cart. She indicated, Sometimes you don't think about it. A policy was provided on 2/9/2024 at 11:16 A.M., by the Director of Nursing (DON). The policy titled, Cleaning/Disinfecting/Maintaining Glucose Meters, indicated .The Glucose meters will be disinfected between each resident use to prevent 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.
“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. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-02-14 for 13 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to INFINITY HEALTHCARE CONSULTING — 69 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
The other 68 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 68; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JOHNSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 03/01/2013 |
| JACKSON, NATHAN | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 06/21/2021 |
| VANCE, CAROLYN | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 11/01/2022 |
| DECOLA, ROBERT | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 02/16/2019 |
| BERKHOUSE, STEVEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/18/2021 |
| DUNKLE, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| THE WATERS OF SYRACUSE SKILLED NURSING FACILITY LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 11/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $402K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
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 155581. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-21, 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.