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

Eastgate Manor Nursing And Rehabilitation

2119 E National Hwy, Washington, IN 47501 · Non profit - Corporation · 62 certified beds · (812) 254-3301 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (812) 254-3301 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 10 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (35% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
109 Cherry Tree Plz · (812) 254-1600 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
10 Williams Brothers Dr · (812) 254-2497 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
300 21st St SE · (812) 254-4171 · Call to confirm hours
Park
310 NE 21st St · (812) 254-6010 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1604 National Hwy E · (812) 254-0161

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
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 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 4 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased2.0%11.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.2%5.5%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.4%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.6%1.1%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.1%25.2%6.5%typical
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.2%3.9%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened2.7%11.9%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.1%23.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.4%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.5%3.6%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.7%23.3%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table5.7%13.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%79.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission7.3%22.2%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.4%10.8%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.291.611.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.271.441.80worse

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

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

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

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

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

52.2% 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 31 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
65.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.30U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.14hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 65.4% 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 26 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 49% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF52.2%CMS range 39.1–68.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.0%CMS range 7.9–16.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge65.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge73.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge53.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened6.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot 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 SNFs1.011.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

1.08
RN hours/ resident / day
0.53
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.89
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.49
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.84
RN hoursweekends
35.3%
Total nursing turnover
28.6%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 62 beds and averages 50.4 residents a day — about 81% occupied, or roughly 12 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 3.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.08 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.89 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 2.87 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.74 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.17 to 0.84 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-02)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-04-19)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-19 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure an environment that was safe, sanitary, and comfortable for 6 of 18 rooms observed. Walls were damaged, lights were not functional, light pull cords were not functional, and privacy curtains were not clean. (room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER]) Findings include: 1. On 4/15/24 at 11:31 a.m., room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed. The bathroom walls were observed to be scratched and gouged. 2. On 4/15/24 at 2:06 p.m., room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed. The light closest to the entry door was observed to not work and the privacy curtain was observed to be stained with a dry brown substance. 3. On 4/15/24 at 2:16 p.m., room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed. The bathroom walls were observed to be scratched and gouged. 4. On 4/15/24 at 2:20 p.m., room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed. Two hooks were observed protruding from the wall above the bed and multiple screws and nails were observed…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-19 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of the Minimum Data Set assessment for 2 of 18 residents reviewed. A urinary catheter and discharge was coded inaccurately. (Resident 52, Resident 54) Findings include: 1. Resident 52's clinical record was reviewed on 4/17/24 at 11:55 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, obstructive and reflux uropathy, unspecified, and neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder. Physician orders, dated 4/1/24 through 4/19/24, for Resident 52 indicated . cath [catheter] orders: Foley catheter Size: 18 Fr [french] 10 mL [milliliters] bulb . The start date for the Foley catheter was 3/26/24. Resident 52's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/31/24, indicated the resident did not have a Foley catheter during the 7 day look back period of 3/25/24 through 3/31/24. 2. Resident 54's clinical record was reviewed on 4/17/24 at 11:56 a.m. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, sepsis. Nursing Progress Notes,…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-19 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a care plan meeting was held in conjunction with the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for care planning. (Resident 49) Findings include: During an interview on 4/16/24 at 11:40 a.m., Resident 49 indicated he and his wife had not been invited to a care plan meeting for a long time and he had not been kept informed of what was going on with his plan of care or when he was going to be able to be discharged back home. Resident 49's clinical record was reviewed on 4/17/24 at 11:00 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, incomplete lesion at C5 level of cervical spinal cord and quadriplegia. A review on 4/17/24 at 11:15 a.m., of the Care Conference Summary notes indicated Resident 49 and his wife attended a care conference meeting on 1/3/24. A care plan, initiated on 3/22/24, and current through target date 6/22/2024, for Resident 49 indicated, . PROBLEM: Resident's discharge goal is to return to the community. Home with possible home care . GOAL: Resident will be…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-19 · tag F0685 — isolated
    Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff assisted a resident in gaining access to vision services by making appointments for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for ancillary services. (Resident 14) Finding includes: During an interview on 4/15/24 at 2:22 p.m., Resident 14 indicated her eyes were getting worse and she thought she needed new glasses. She indicated she had an eye doctor she was supposed to go see, however, she did not know when her next appointment was scheduled. On 4/16/24 at 11:12 a.m., Resident 14's clinical record was reviewed. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, diabetes type 2 and hypertension. A 2/7/24 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated the resident was cognitively intact. A 8/29/23 Optometry Doctor (OD) assessment, indicated the patient was diagnosed with diabetic retinopathy (damage to the blood vessels in the tissue at the back of the eye), macular degeneration (loss in the center of the field of vision), pseudophakia (having an artificial lens implanted after the natural eye lens has been removed), dry…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-19 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a urinary drainage bag and tubing attached to a urinary catheter was positioned off the floor for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for urinary catheters. (Resident 52) Finding includes: On 4/15/24 at 10:54 a.m., Resident 52 was observed to be sitting in her wheelchair in her room. The urinary drainage bag was observed to be touching the floor. On 4/15/24 at 3:08 p.m., Resident 52 was observed to be rolling around the hallway in her wheelchair. The urinary drainage bag was observed to be dragging the floor. On 4/17/24 at 11:10 a.m., Resident 52 was observed to be sitting in her wheelchair in her room. The urinary drainage tubing was observed to be been touching the floor. Resident 52's clinical record was reviewed on 4/17/24 at 11:55 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, obstructive and reflux uropathy, unspecified, and neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder. Physician orders, dated 4/1/24 through 4/19/24, for Resident 52 indicated . cath [catheter] orders: Foley catheter Size: 18 Fr [french] 10…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure 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 ensure food was stored and distributed in accordance with professional standards for food service safety during 2 of 2 kitchen observations. Food packages were stored on the floor of the walk-in refrigerator and walk-in freezer, and food was open to air in the walk-in freezer. Finding includes: During an observation on 2/28/24 at 10:35 A.M. a walk-in freezer contained a bag of peas that were open to air. A walk-in refrigerator contained a box of chopped celery and a box of whole tomatoes resting directly on the floor. During an observation on 2/29/24 at 9:55 A.M., a walk-in freezer contained a bag of peas that were open to air and a box of meat patties resting directly on the floor. A walk-in refrigerator contained a box of chopped celery and a box of whole tomatoes resting directly on the floor. During an interview on 2/29/24 at 10:00 A.M., [NAME] 2 indicated that stored food containers should be wrapped up or closed tightly to ensure the food is not open to air and that food containers should be stored up…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-07-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure 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 ensure food items were properly labeled and not expired. There was food in the freezer open to air. The wall by the oven hood was peeled off, parts of the wall were hanging, brick was exposed, and debris was on the floor under the oven which included parts of the wall during 4 of 4 kitchen observations. Findings include: During the initial tour of the kitchen on 7/11/22 at 10:03 A.M., the following was observed: Dry storage: An open bag of devils food cake mix wrapped in plastic wrap dated 4/17/22 and 4/22/22. An open bag of cheese sauce wrapped in plastic wrap dated 5/21/22, 6/28/22, 7/4/22. A large container with oats dated 6/5/22 and 7/5/22. An open vanilla instant pudding wrapped in plastic wrap dated 11/12/21. An open chocolate pudding dated 12/3/21 and 3/28/22. Plastic wrapped around aluminum foil with white crumbs dispersed throughout dated 10/17/22, 10/25/21, and two other unreadable dates. Refrigerator: A quart of half and half milk with the cap dated 7/2/22 and 7/8/22. Freezer: A clear bag 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-07-14 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a safe, sanitary, and a homelike environment in resident spaces in 1 of 4 halls observed. (South hall) Findings include: 1. On 07/12/22 at 10:20 A.M., 2 (two) rolls of toilet paper were uncovered and sitting on top of the toilet tank in the bathroom of room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 07/13/22 at 11:38 A.M., the same was observed. 2. On 7/11/22 at 11:10 A.M., the call light in the bathroom of room [ROOM NUMBER] was detached from the wall and hanging with wires out and the call light was not working. The sink was slow to drain. On 07/13/22 02:49 P.M., the same was observed. 3. On 07/11/22 at 10:51 A.M., there was a used washrag laying on an uncovered dishpan on the floor of the bathroom in the room of 136 observed. 1 (one) roll of toilet paper was uncovered and sitting on top of the toilet tank. A set of uncovered tongs was laying on the floor by the toilet and the sink was slow to drain. On 07/13/22 at 02:18 P.M., 2 (two) rolls of toilet…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-07-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident in order to meet medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. Staff did not implement care plan interventions for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for hydration, and 2 of 2 residents reviewed for activities of daily living. (Resident 17, Resident 23, Resident 1) Findings include: 1. On 7/11/22 at 10:50 A.M., Resident 17 was observed lying in bed. A grab bar on the left side of the bed was observed attached and in an upright position. No grab bar was observed on the right side of the bed. A call light was observed lying at the head of the bed above Resident 17's head. Resident 17 was unable to reach the call light when asked to. On 7/12/22 at 1:44 P.M., Resident 17's clinical record was reviewed. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, depression and Parkinson's disease. The most recent significant change MDS (minimum data set) Assessment, dated 5/10/22 indicated Resident 17 required…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2022-07-14 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and record review, the facility failed to ensure the daily posted nurse staffing reflected the actual hours worked by staff for 4 of 4 days of daily posted nurse staffing reviewed. Finding includes: On 7/11/22 at 10:50 A.M., the Posted Nurse Staffing was observed. The Posted Nurse Staffing lacked the actual hours worked. On 7/14/22 at 9:40 A.M., the Posted Nurse Staffing was observed. The Posted Nurse Staffing lacked the actual hours worked. On 7/14/22 at 10:00 A.M., the Nurse scheduler provided the Posted Nurse Staffing for 7/11/22-7/14/22. The Posted Nurse Staffing lacked the actual hours worked. On 7/14/22 at 10:45 A.M., the facility administrator supplied a facility policy titled, Posted Nurse Staffing Data and Retention Requirements, and dated 07/2019. The policy included, 1. The facility must post the following information at the beginning of each shift . d. The total number and actual hours worked by . licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift .

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES — 90 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.9+1.1 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.4+1.6 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.3+0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.7+0.3 vs chain
The other 89 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Valparaiso Care & RehabilitationValparaiso, IN 2 of 5Arbor Grove VillageGreensburg, IN 2 of 5Bethany VillageIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Columbia Healthcare CenterEvansville, IN 2 of 5Community Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Eagle Valley MeadowsIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Harcourt Terrace Nursing And RehabilitationIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Harrison TerraceIndianapolis, IN 2 of 5Hickory Creek At New CastleNew Castle, IN 2 of 5Maple Park VillageWestfield, IN 2 of 5Park Terrace VillageEvansville, IN 2 of 5Riverside VillageElkhart, IN 2 of 5Trailpoint VillageSouth Bend, IN 2 of 5University Nursing CenterUpland, IN 2 of 5Williamsport Nursing And RehabilitationWilliamsport, IN 3 of 5Allisonville MeadowsFishers, IN 3 of 5American VillageIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Brownsburg MeadowsBrownsburg, IN 3 of 5Countryside MeadowsAvon, IN 3 of 5East Lake Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterElkhart, IN 3 of 5Hickory Creek At CrawfordsvilleCrawfordsville, IN 3 of 5Hillcrest VillageJeffersonville, IN 3 of 5North Capitol Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Rosebud VillageRichmond, IN 3 of 5Rosewalk VillageIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Rosewalk Village At LafayetteLafayette, IN 3 of 5Spring Mill MeadowsIndianapolis, IN 3 of 5Stonebrooke Rehabilitation CenterNew Castle, IN 4 of 5Autumn Ridge Rehabilitation CentreWabash, IN 4 of 5Beech Grove MeadowsBeech Grove, IN 4 of 5Clark Rehabilitation And Skilled Nursing CenterClarksville, IN 4 of 5Clinton GardensClinton, IN 4 of 5Creekside VillageMishawaka, IN 4 of 5Edgewater WoodsAnderson, IN 4 of 5Forest Creek VillageIndianapolis, IN 4 of 5Franklin MeadowsFranklin, IN 4 of 5Heritage House Rehabilitation & Health Care CenterConnersville, IN 4 of 5Hickory Creek At ColumbusColumbus, IN 4 of 5Hickory Creek At MadisonMadison, IN 4 of 5Hickory Creek At PeruPeru, IN

Showing 40 of 89; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
CHIES, STEVENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/17/2016
JACKSON, BLAKEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/01/2015
JACKSON, ETHANIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/01/2015
JACKSON, MARKIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/01/2015
JACKSON, MICHAELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/14/2024
JACKSON, WESSLEYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/01/2015
JUSTICE, DAVIDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/01/2015
KELSEY, DONNAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/18/2024
STITLE, STEPHENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/16/2016
WRIGHT, THERESSAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/21/2021
DRUMMER, CARLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2017
HANIFY, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2022
HORN, BRENDAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 12/01/2023
LAZARD, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/28/2021
MANTRAVADI, GEETAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/21/2021
PAYNE, MONICAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/09/2021
BABCOCK, PAULIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/30/2020
CAINE, VIRGINIAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/10/1994
HARRIS, LISAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/22/2003
AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2015
BURLA, KIRANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/31/2026
DICE, MARKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023
HUBBELL, STACEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/31/2026
SANDERS, TIAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2024
SHANE, ANDREWIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2023
VAN CAMP, STEVENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 32 rows in the source record cover these 26 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$5.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-18.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$615K
Related-party expense10% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 69%Medicare 7%Other / private 24%

This home reported $615K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$381per resident / day
operating cost
$11,568per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$322per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in IN

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 155341. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-02, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next