3801 Old Bruceville Road, Box 136, Vincennes, IN 47591 · Knox County · (812) 882-1783
170 certified beds, about 93 residents a day · For profit - Individual · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 155042 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 26, 2026, inspectors cited 12 health deficiencies (the Indiana average is 7.2, the national average 9.2).
Of 65 health citations since January 2024, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 2.93 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Indiana and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.52 of those hours.
65.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Indiana average 45.9%).
CMS links it to Aperion Care, an affiliated group of 33 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 65 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure ongoing communication was maintained for 1 of 2 resident reviewed for dialysis services. Dialysis communication forms or any other documented dialysis visit notes could not be retrieved by the facility and Director of Nursing was not aware that the dialysis center had changed a resident's prescribed dialysis schedule from three (3) days per week to two (2) days per week. (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate pharmaceutical services were available to provide physician prescribed routine medications to 2 of 3 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. Residents did not receive routine physician prescribed medications due to the medications not being available and new physician prescribed medication was not started timely following a readmission from the hospital. (Resident B, Resident C)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure laboratory services were provided for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for quality of care. Labs were not completed per the physician's order. (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure clinical records contained bed hold policy, completed transfer/discharge forms, and documentation that a representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman was notified of transfer/discharge for 7 of 7 residents reviewed for hospitalizations. The clinical records lacked documentation of bed hold, transfer/discharge forms, and notification to Ombudsman for residents reviewed. (Resident 12, Resident D, Resident 4, Resident B, Resident 3, Resident 1, Resident 6)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure accuracy of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for hospice, 1 of 5 reviewed for unnecessary medications, 1 of 1 reviewed for medication side effects, and 1 of 1 reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Reviews (PASRR). Residents who received hospice services were marked as not getting them, a resident with a diagnosis of dementia was not identified as having that diagnosis, and a resident's PASRR was not marked on their MDS assessment. (Resident 4, Resident 24, Resident 63, Resident 12)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed for 4 of 5 residents reviewed for nutrition and hospitalizations, and 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers . Weekly weights were not completed as ordered and medications were not reviewed by the primary care physician when the resident returned from the hospital. (Resident 6, Resident 24, Resident 35, Resident 4, Resident 3)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that dependent residents were receiving Activities of Daily Living (ADL) services for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for ADLs and 3 of 3 residents in Resident Council. Resident's did not receive showers and oral care. (Resident B, Resident C, Resident D)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe medication storage for 1 of 3 hall carts observed. Medication carts were left unlocked and unsupervised, and medications were left unsupervised on the top of a medication cart. (D Hall Medication Cart)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed leading to a discontinuance of an anticonvulsant medication for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for medication side effects. A resident's anticonvulsant medication was discontinued despite a physician's contraindication to discontinue. The physician nor family were notified of the medication discontinuance. (Resident 63)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter received care to prevent a urinary tract infection for 1 of 1 resident's reviewed for urinary catheters. A resident did not receive routine catheter care and was hospitalized for a Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infection (CAUTI). (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a plan was in place to control a resident's pain for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for pain management. A resident indicated his pain was not controlled, staff were not giving routine pain medication as ordered, documentation lacked pain characteristics, non pharmacological interventions were not in place, and notification to the Medical Doctor was not consistently documented.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation in resident clinical records for 2 of 2 records reviewed. A resident that was in the hospital had a progress note with vital signs documented in the clinical record. A resident had a shower documented when it was not given. (Resident D, Resident C)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure hospice communication and documentation was occurring between the facility and the hospice company for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for hospice. The clinical record lacked hospice communication. (Resident 4)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the past 3 years of state survey results were readily available to visitors, residents, and other individuals without them having to ask to review them for 2 of 2 days reviewed for the survey period.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the posted nurse staffing form was posted on all entrances of the facility for 8 of 8 days reviewed for the survey. (3/17/26, 3/18/26, 3/19/26, 3/20/26, 3/23/26, 3/24/26, 3/25/26, 3/26/26).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received end of life care for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for hospice care. A collaborative plan of care was not established for residents who received hospice services and routine assessments, and physician orders were not completed. (Resident B, Resident C)1. During record review on 10/20/25 at 1:15 P.M., Resident B's diagnoses included but were not limited to chronic kidney disease and malignant cancer. Resident B's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 9/3/25, indicated the resident had not received hospice services. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from accident hazards for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents. Staff provided hot water to a resident without monitoring or checking the temperature of the water. The resident spilled the hot water which resulted in second-degree burns to the resident's abdomen, left hip, and lower back. This deficient practice resulted from a failure to follow the facility's procedure for serving hot beverages and contributed the development of second-degree burns that required routine treatment and the resident pain rated at a 5 on a scale of 0 - 10 (zero indicating no pain and 10 indicating the most pain). (Resident C)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a safe, sanitary, and homelike environment in 1 of 3 resident units observed and 1 of 2 dining rooms observed. Resident areas had missing paint on the walls, missing cove base, plywood covering a window, and a dark decolorization to dining room vaulted ceiling. (C/D halls, room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER] and C/D dining room)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary environment was maintained in accordance with professional standards for food services safety during 1 of 1 kitchen observations. Containers of food were stored on the dry food storage room floor and on the walk-in freezer floor, and a buildup of dust and debris was observed over the cookstove hood, on the ceiling in and around the vents above the dishwashing area, on top of the dishwasher, and along the base of the walls and floor.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure necessary treatment and services were provided to prevent and promote healing of facility acquired pressure injuries for 3 of 8 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Specific care plans were not developed, physician orders and other interventions not followed, and assessments were not completed thoroughly or accurately. This deficient practice resulted in facility acquired unstageable, Stage 3, and Stage 4 pressure ulcers. (Resident 20, Resident 7, Resident 25)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills set to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service for 1 of 1 kitchens observed. The Dietary Manager was not certified. (Dietary Manager)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a notice of transfer or discharge was given to residents or resident representatives for 5 of 5 residents reviewed for hospitalizations and transfers. There was no documentation of a resident or representative receiving a notice of transfer or discharge at the time of hospitalization. (Resident D, Resident B, Resident 79, Resident 48, Resident 30)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a bed hold policy was given to residents or resident representatives for 5 of 5 residents reviewed for hospitalizations and transfers. There was no documentation of a resident or representative receiving a bed hold policy at the time of hospitalization. (Resident D, Resident B, Resident 79, Resident 48, Resident 30)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team (IDT) after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments. Care plans weren't revised for residents that were nothing by mouth (NPO), had a bed alarm, had a catheter removed, and a decline in activities of daily living (ADLs). (Resident C, Resident 73, Resident 79, Resident 4)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who displayed or was diagnosed with dementia, received the appropriate treatment and services to attain or maintain his highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 5 residents reviewed on the dementia unit. A Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) failed to provide appropriate Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care for a resident on the dementia unit along with other concerns on the hall with 15 men. (Resident B, men's hall)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow facility policy by ensuring safe and secure storage of medications for 5 residents during 2 random observations of the medication carts. Medications had been pre-prepared and held in medication cups in the medication cart prior to administration. (Resident B, Resident G, Resident 76, Resident 34, Resident 19)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure menus were being followed by dietary staff for 1 of 1 kitchens reviewed. (Kitchen)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 4 of 6 residents observed for infection control. Staff did not clean the shared glucometer prior to use, staff was not using proper personal protective equipment (PPE) or signage, and hands were not sanitized between glove use. (Resident C, Resident D, Resident G, Resident H)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for dignity concerns and one random observation. Residents felt like staff were rude and not in a hurry to provide care and staff made unkind comments about a resident within hearing distance of that resident. (Resident C, Resident E, Resident F)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure timely care plan conferences with residents and/or their representatives for 3 of 7 residents reviewed for care plan conferences. Care plan conferences were not held quarterly for residents and/or their representatives to participate in planning of care. (Resident D, Resident 4, Resident 35)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to clarify a Resident's code status for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for advanced directives. A resident's current facesheet and Physician's Order did not match the signed Indiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment form. (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an incident report contained an explanation of the circumstances for an alleged incident. The incident report lacked details related to the actual incident reported involving a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) and resident. (CNA 31, Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a care plan for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications, and 1 of 1 residents reviewed for hospice services. A resident was administered an anticoagulant and an antiplatelet and did not have a care plan related to the medication. A resident received hospice services but lacked a care plan. (Resident D, Resident 79, Resident 67)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with indwelling urinary catheters received appropriate orders and services to prevent urinary tract infections (UTI) for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for catheter care. A resident's urinary catheter bag was not placed lower then his bladder and a resident with a urinary catheter did not have an order. (Resident D, Resident 48)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) met the needs of each resident for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for antibiotic use. A resident's antibiotics (taken for multiple infections) were not continued in a timely manner after discharge from the hospital. (Resident D)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure it was free of a medication error rate of greater than 5 percent for 2 of 3 residents (Residents 6, Resident D) observed during medication pass. Two medication errors were observed during 31 opportunities for error in medication administration. This resulted in a medication error rate of 6.45 percent.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure prevention of a significant medication error for 1 of 3 residents observed for medication administration. A dose of insulin was not given resulting in an increase of blood sugar. (Resident 6)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure smoking policies related to smoking safety were enforced for 2 of 2 random observation of smoking. (Resident K, Resident 51, Resident 20)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary environment was maintained in accordance with professional standards for food services safety during 2 of 2 kitchen observations. Kitchen staffs' hair was not fully contained within a hairnet, and kitchen staff failed to complete proper hand hygiene.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a safe, sanitary, and homelike environment in 2 of 6 resident halls observed. Resident areas had holes in walls, floors appeared dirty and unmopped, bedpans were stored uncovered, cove base was missing from a resident restroom, a vent fan was missing a cover in a resident restroom, used Styrofoam cups were not removed from a resident's room, and resident wheelchairs had not been cleaned. (C/D Halls, Resident D, Resident F, room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], Resident H, Resident G, Resident M)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident records were accurate and complete for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure wounds and 1 of 3 residents reviewed for diabetic care. Medication Administration Records (MAR) and Treatment Administration Records (TAR) were not documented completely. (Resident D)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a safe, sanitary, and homelike environment in 3 of 4 resident halls observed and 2 of 3 shared restrooms observed. Resident rooms were missing window trim, had stained toilet bowels, and were missing thresholds between doorways, shared shower rooms were missing light covers, cove base, corner trim, had cracked or broken tiles, had a broken switch plate, and had old screw holes in the walls, and hall floors were missing baseboard and had worn spots and paint splatters. (C/D Halls and shower rooms, GHI shower room, room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER])
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure routine catheter care and ostomy care was completed for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for catheter/ostomy care. Routine catheter and ostomy care was not provided per the residents' plan of care. (Resident C, Resident D, Resident F)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was clinically appropriate to administer their own medications without supervision by qualified staff during a random observation during the survey. A resident was alone in their room with a cup of medications sitting at their bedside table. (Resident F)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's plan of care was followed for 1 of 4 resident care plans reviewed. A resident did not receive care from at least 2 staff members according to the resident's plan of care, resulting in an allegation of staff negligence. (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with bathing for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). Residents did not receive assistance with ADL's (bathing) according to the plan of care and bathing schedule. (Resident B, Resident C)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a complete and accurate facility assessment for 1 of 1 reviewed based on the resident population and identification of resources needed to provide the necessary care and services required for their residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity for 1 of 6 residents observed for care, and 3 of 3 random observations. A staff member was observed speaking to a resident in an undignified manner, a resident waited on a meal for over 22 minutes after other residents were served, a resident was observed wearing clothing belonging to a recently deceased resident, and staff opened a window during care against the resident's wishes. (Resident 30, Resident 55, Resident 127, Anonymous Resident)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure care was provided in accordance with the written plan of care for 5 of 5 residents reviewed. Care plan interventions and orders were not followed or implemented for the following: fluid restriction, skin assessment, prescribed antibiotics, hand splints, and performance of household chores. (Resident 7, Resident 45, Resident 58, Resident 60, Resident 127)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a care plan for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for development of care plans and failed to provide care plan conferences with residents and residents' representatives for 5 of 5 residents reviewed for care plan conferences. A resident lacked a care plan for dialysis and dementia. A resident lacked a care plan for smoking. (Resident 17, Resident 24, Resident 31, Resident 57, Resident 58)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities for 2 of 7 halls reviewed. A and B Halls lacked activities in accordance with the activity calendar. (Locked Dementia Unit A and B Hall)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 4 of 5 residents reviewed for accidents. A resident was found smoking several times in his room/bathroom and was still allowed to carry his smoking supplies on his person. Residents' care plan interventions were not followed and alarms were not working. (Resident 57, Resident 25, Resident 127, Resident 178)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient and competent nursing staff was provided for 1 of 3 units reviewed, 2 of 6 resident council meetings reviewed, and 2 of 2 resident grievances reviewed. Incontinence care was not completed, hospice orders were not in place, interventions were not followed resulting in falls, notification was not completed following significant changes, and the unit was observed to not be sufficiently staffed. (A/B Unit)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure all the freezers in the kitchen had thermometers in them and temperature logs filled out for 1 of 1 kitchen observations. The ice cream freezer did not have a thermometer in it and the freezer in dry storage lacked a temperature log for January 2024. (Kitchen)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were followed for 5 of 9 residents during observation of perineal care. Gloves were not changed between dirty and clean tasks during peri care, staff dropped gloves on the floor and picked them up and used them to perform peri care. Staff failed to sanitize hands between dirty and clean tasks and after completing peri care (Resident 16, Resident 66, Resident B, Resident 55, Resident E)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary environment for resident rooms and halls. The outside of the building had paint peeled off the frame and window frames. The water temperature on the dementia unit was hot. (A wing, B wing, C wing, D wing, E wing, I wing)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure notification to a resident's healthcare provider following a significant change for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for nutrition. The Registered Dietician (RD) was not notified following a significant weight loss, and the physician was not notified of a significant weight loss or medication recommendation. (Resident 54)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a new diagnosis of schizophrenia was reviewed for appropriateness for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 63)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide emergency basic life support immediately when needed, including CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for CPR. Staff did not immediately provide services to a resident that required emergency care and CPR. (Resident 178)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with limited mobility received appropriate services and assistance to prevent further decrease in range of motion for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for the restorative nursing program. (Resident 7, Resident 29)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents incontinent of urine received incontinence services and assistance. Residents were observed saturated with urine at the end of night shift for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for incontinence care. (Resident B, Resident E)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors for 1 of 1 insulin administration. The nurse failed to prime the insulin pen before administering insulin to a resident. (Resident 60)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate documentation of resident records for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for nutrition, and 1 of 2 residents reviewed for restorative nursing program. (Resident 54, Resident 7)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow 2 of 2 hospice contracts to ensure communication from the Hospice providers were available for the facility staff. Hospice diet orders were not put into place when ordered, and hospice communication was not available for review on a unit with a Hospice resident. (Resident 28, Resident 178)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the smoking policy was followed for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for smoking. A resident has been caught smoking in his room and was still considered a safe smoker and allowed to keep his smoking supplies on his person. (Resident 57)
35 fire safety citations on file: 6 on March 26, 2026, 9 on February 13, 2025, 20 on January 26, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 13, 2025 | Payment Denial | 14 days from March 14, 2025 |
| January 26, 2024 | Payment Denial | 11 days from April 26, 2024 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Indiana | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 2.93 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.52 | 0.67 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.65 | 3.25 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.60 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.81 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 65.1% | 45.9% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 22.2% | 40.3% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.84 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.04 on weekdays and 2.65 on weekends, 13% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.9% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.48 in April to June 2025 to 2.93 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 2.93 | 0.52 | 3.04 | 2.65 | 1.9% | 0 of 90 | 93 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.84 | 0.53 | 2.94 | 2.59 | 0.4% | 0 of 92 | 91 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.22 | 0.47 | 3.33 | 2.93 | 13.3% | 0 of 92 | 93 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.48 | 0.40 | 3.63 | 3.11 | 28.3% | 0 of 91 | 89 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Indiana, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.63 | 0.62 | 3.80 | 3.19 | 3.4% | 0.4% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indiana, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.43 | $17.80 to $21.36 | 33,640 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $31.60 | $29.35 to $35.30 | 14,480 |
| Registered nurses | $40.14 | $37.86 to $48.28 | 68,980 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Indiana | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.1 | 11.0 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.6 | 3.9 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.3 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.2 | 11.9 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.6 | 3.6 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 33.7 | 13.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 30.6 | 22.2 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.3 | 10.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Aperion Care Vincennes's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (39.9% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
39.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Indiana: 111 better, 7 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 38 eligible stays.
11.0% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Indiana: 0 better, 17 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 69 eligible stays.
7.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Indiana: 0 better, 4 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 51 eligible stays.
60.0% this home
Median of homes: Indiana60.0% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 40 residents counted.
3.6% this home
Median of homes: Indiana0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 56 residents counted.
5.7% this home
Median of homes: Indiana1.4% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 56 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Indiana100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 9 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: DAVIESS COUNTY HOSPITAL. CMS links this home to Aperion Care, a group of 33 nursing homes averaging 2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daviess County Hospital | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 01/01/2017 | |
| Hendrix, Charles | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Wesley, Ashli | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Steiner, Deron | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Conroy, Tracy | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2017 | |
| Rodewald, Amanda | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2017 | |
| Aperion Care Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 03/01/2024 | |
| Aperion Care Vincennes, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 03/01/2024 | |
| Berkowitz, David | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Goldfarb, Brian | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Hoffman, Joshua | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Meystel, Jay | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Meystel, Yosef | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Spector, Jennifer | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Turofsky, Steven | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Ulbert, Lisa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2024 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Indiana. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.