990 N 16th St., New Castle, IN 47362 · Henry County · (765) 529-0230
117 certified beds, about 69 residents a day · Government - County · Medicare and Medicaid since 1974
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 155160 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on May 20, 2025, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Indiana average is 7.2, the national average 9.2).
Of 32 health citations since January 2023, 1 was 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 4.24 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Indiana and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.50 of those hours.
38.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Indiana average 45.9%).
CMS links it to American Senior Communities, an affiliated group of 90 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 32 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from mental abuse by a staff member obtaining a photograph of the resident's genitalia without the resident's permission and showing other staff members resulting in unauthorized photographs taken for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident B) Using the reasonable person concept, it is likely this would lead to humiliation, confusion, anxiety, and embarrassment for Resident B.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to report an allegation of mental abuse of a resident by a staff member taking a picture of the resident's genitalia in a timely manner to the Indiana Department of Health (IDOH) for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide dignified incontinent care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for dignity (Resident D).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free of verbal abuse for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident C and Resident F).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to timely report an incident of alleged verbal abuse to the Executive Director for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for reporting abuse. (Resident C)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide showers as preferred for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). (Resident B and Resident E)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a chair cushion was in place for a resident with stage 2 pressure ulcers (partial thickness skin loss) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for pressure ulcers. (Resident E)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was weighed, as ordered, and a resident was provided with an adaptive drinking device, as ordered, for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for nutrition. (Resident 50 and Resident 59)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement interventions when residents were kissing in the common area on the memory care unit for 1 of 1 observation of behaviors (Resident 35 and Resident 53).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper infection control measures were maintained during incontinence care for 1 of 1 resident observed for pressure ulcers. (Resident E)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to routinely document the meal intakes for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for resident assessment. (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure to maintain a clean, sanitary kitchen, ensure the holding refrigerator didn't contain unlabeled and/or expired foods, ensure bread was discarded that contained a fuzzy green, yellow substance, and ensure a cup was not present in the bulk storage bin. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents who receive food from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident rooms were in good repair related to the walls, headboard, and cove base (soft flexible material along the bottom part of the wall) in a bathroom for 6 of 72 residents reviewed for environment. (Resident 283, 40, 18, 44, 11, and 28)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for a resident discharged from hospice services (Resident 78) for 1 of 3 resident reviewed for timeliness of significant change assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately indicate the use of hospice services (Resident 43) and failed to accurately code oxygen therapy (Resident 10 and 65) for 3 of 16 resident reviewed for MDS accuracy.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure continuation of treatment for a resident with pressure ulcers for Resident 55, and failed to ensure Resident 10 and 136's interventions were in place for pressure ulcer prevention and treatment. This affected 3 of 4 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place after a fall had occurred for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident 55)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to have an ongoing activity program on the dementia care unit for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for activities (Resident C and Resident D).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a dietary staff member did not work while experiencing signs and symptoms of a gastrointestinal illness and ensure 48 hours had passed since symptoms started.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident identified with non-pressure-related skin concerns had timely and routine assessments and documentation of the same conducted of their skin concerns for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for skin issues. (Resident D)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure temperature logs were completed and the sanitizing solution was tested for a chemical dishwasher that resulted in lack of sanitizing solution being distributed for an unknown period of time. This had the potential to affect all 78 residents that receive food from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain clean tables in the activity/dining room on the locked unit. This affected all 19 residents who used the activity/dining room.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure accuracy of the MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment regarding 2 residents' dental status (Resident 61 and Resident 47), indicate the use of BiPap/CPAP device for Resident 39, and indicate dialysis for Resident 43 for 4 of 29 residents reviewed for MDS accuracy.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement care plans for a resident with high blood pressure medications and low thyroid hormone medication (Resident 36), a resident with a catheter (Resident 74), a resident with a BiPap (bilevel positive airway pressure)/CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure) for Resident 39, and low air loss mattress for Resident 50. This affected 4 of 29 reviewed for care plans.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure showers were provided as preferred (Resident 31) and a resident was toileted timely that resulted in incontinence (Resident 46) for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow-up with a change in a resident's condition of decreased level of consciousness and decreased appetite that was later hospitalized with sepsis for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for change of condition. (Resident G)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a treatment was initiated timely for an identified pressure ulcer after readmission to the facility for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. (Resident 47)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to implement fall interventions for a Resident at risk for falls for 1 of 3 residents review for fall management. (Resident 43)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to promote Resident 234's dignity by utilizing a dignity bag with a urinary catheter drainage bag and failed to ensure Resident 74's urinary catheter drainage bag was kept free of contact with the floor for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for urinary catheter management.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a pharmacy recommendation was followed up timely by the physician, for 1 of 5 residents reviewed. (Resident 72)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide education for the risk of using antipsychotic medications (Residents 36 and 72), and failed to identify and monitor target behaviors for a resident receiving antipsychotic medications (Resident 42). This affected 3 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure therapy recommendations were followed through and therapy referrals were followed up with timely for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for therapy services. (Resident 62)
26 fire safety citations on file: 11 on May 20, 2025, 5 on March 22, 2024, 10 on January 24, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 4.24 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.50 | 0.67 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.66 | 3.25 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.85 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.90 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 38.8% | 45.9% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 57.1% | 40.3% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 4.22 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 4.48 on weekdays and 3.66 on weekends, 18% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.77 in April to June 2025 to 4.24 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 | 4.24 | 0.50 | 4.48 | 3.66 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 69 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.79 | 0.53 | 4.01 | 3.21 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 74 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.86 | 0.52 | 4.10 | 3.24 | 0.0% | 1 of 92 | 73 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.77 | 0.45 | 4.03 | 3.11 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 77 |
| 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 | 6.8 | 11.0 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.8 | 3.9 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.8 | 11.9 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.2 | 3.6 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.3 | 13.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.3 | 22.2 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 8.7 | 10.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.8 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Stonebrooke Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (49.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
49.0% 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. 58 eligible stays.
11.7% 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. 61 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 24 eligible stays.
30.0% 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. 20 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 27 residents counted.
5.8% 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. 27 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: HENRY COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL. CMS links this home to American Senior Communities, a group of 90 nursing homes averaging 3.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Henry County Memorial Hospital | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 01/01/2023 |
| Chies, Steven | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Dynes, Sheldon | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2013 | |
| Jackson, Blake | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Jackson, Ethan | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Jackson, Mark | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Jackson, Michael | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/14/2024 | |
| Jackson, Wessley | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Justice, David | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Kelsey, Donna | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/18/2024 | |
| Pidgeon, John | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2013 | |
| Shore, Marion | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2013 | |
| Stitle, Stephen | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Ware, Deborah | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/27/2021 | |
| Wright, Theressa | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Ring, Brian | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| American Senior Communities LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2023 | |
| Carter, Amy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Davis, Keith | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/18/2025 | |
| Dice, Mark | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/01/2023 | |
| Rains, Amanda | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/28/2021 | |
| Reno, Ashley | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2026 | |
| Ring, Brian | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Shane, Andrew | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/01/2023 | |
| Van Camp, Steven | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/01/2023 | |
| Dynes, Sheldon | Trustee of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2013 | |
| Pidgeon, John | Trustee of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2013 | |
| Shore, Marion | Trustee of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2013 | |
| Ware, Deborah | Trustee of the SNF | Individual | 08/27/2021 | |
| American Senior Communities LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/25/2025 | |
| Henry County Memorial Hospital | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/07/2025 | |
| Carter, Amy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/25/2025 | |
| Davis, Keith | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/25/2025 | |
| Dice, Mark | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/01/2023 | |
| Shane, Andrew | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/01/2023 | |
| Van Camp, Steven | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/01/2023 |
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.