2901 W 37th Ave, Hobart, IN 46342 · Lake County · (219) 942-2170
110 certified beds, about 63 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1985
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 155251 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 17, 2025, inspectors cited 13 health deficiencies (the Indiana average is 7.2, the national average 9.2).
None of its 46 health citations since May 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.24 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Indiana and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.44 of those hours.
48.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Indiana average 45.9%).
CMS links it to Infinity Healthcare Consulting, an affiliated group of 70 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 46 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure antihypertensive medications and insulin were held per parameters for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for blood pressure parameters and 1 of 2 residents reviewed for insulin. The facility also failed to ensure follow-up documentation was completed after a fall for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for a change in condition and dry scaly feet were assessed and treated for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for non-pressure related skin conditions. (Residents M, L, E, and N)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were in place and implemented related to the improper storage of bed pans and urinals during random room observations and staff failing to wear the correct personal protective equipment (PPE) for residents in droplet and enhanced barrier precautions for 2 of 2 units. (The East and [NAME] Units, Residents O and K)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was stored and prepared under safe conditions related to storage of housekeeping chemical test kits in the walk-in cooler near food items, unlabeled and undated opened stored food, and lack of accurate temperature and sanitation logs for 1 of 1 kitchen. This had the potential to affect 57 of 59 residents who resided in the facility and received food from the kitchen. (The Main Kitchen)
Inspectors wrote3. During random observations on 6/9/25 at 9:10 a.m., 6/10/25 at 10:10 a.m., and 6/11/25 at 9:10 a.m., tubes of clotrimazole and betamethasone diphenhydramine (a topical antifungal) and hydrogel (an advanced topical wound treatment) were observed on Resident 32's nightstand. At that time, the resident indicated staff left the topical medications in the room for when they provided wound care to her and Resident 36, who shared the room. The record for Resident 32 was reviewed on 6/17/25 at 10:30 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, morbid obesity, chronic kidney disease, and difficulty walking. The 5/28/25 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment and required maximal assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) and transfers. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment was clean and in good repair related to marred walls, floors, and doors, missing toilet paper holders, dirty base boards, dirty over bed table, and uncontained personal care items in a shared environment in 2 of 2 units. (The East and [NAME] Units)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had physician's orders for medications and an assessment to self-administer their own medications for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for self-administration of medication. (Residents 18 and 52)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's physician was notified of medication refusals for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 47)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) comprehensive assessment was accurately completed related to mobility, hearing, and insulin use for 2 of 19 MDS assessments reviewed. (Residents 3 and 38)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure activities of daily living (ADLs) were completed for dependent residents related to skin and nail care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for ADLs. (Resident 166)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received the necessary treatment and services related to a delay in scheduling a post-operative doctor's appointment for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for skin conditions non-pressure related, assessment and treatment of edema for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for edema, and holding an insulin dose without an order for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Residents 166, 52, and 36)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure timely podiatry visits were provided related to painful ingrown toenails for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for foot care. (Resident 55)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was set at the correct flow rate for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Residents 5 and 13)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure blood pressure and heart rate parameters were monitored for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 5)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the medical record was complete and accurately documented related to infection monitoring for 2 of 3 records reviewed for infections. (Residents 3 and 36)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were in place and implemented related to the cleaning of a shared glucometer before and after use for 1 of 1 glucometer (machine used to test blood sugar levels) test observed. (Resident 34)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a pressure ulcer received the necessary treatment and services to promote healing, related to treatments not completed as ordered for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. (Resident F)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure appropriate treatment and services were provided to residents with feeding tubes, related to physician's orders not followed when checking for proper placement of the feeding tubes, for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for feeding tube care. (Residents B and E)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to have ongoing communication with a resident's dialysis center, related to the facility not checking on a resident's location when they did not return from a dialysis appointment, for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for dialysis. (Resident C)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's record had thorough and accurate documentation related to a Physician consult appointment, admission cardiac assessment, pressure ulcer assessment, and documentation of pressure ulcers, for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for medical record documentation. (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure correct Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) was used by staff members (CNA 5, CNA 1, and QMA 2) when providing care to residents (Residents E and F) who were in Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for two random observations for infection control.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment was clean and in good repair, related to personal items not contained in a shared environment, discolored floor tile, missing caulk around toilet bases, leaking toilets, dried tube feeding on the base of poles, and urine odors in 1 of 2 units. (West Unit)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had physician's orders for medications and an assessment to self-administer their own medications for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for self-administration of medication. (Residents 100 and 2)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide ADL (activities of daily living) assistance to dependent residents related to nail care and the removal of facial hair for 2 of 7 residents reviewed for ADL care. (Residents 44 and 22)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure areas of bruising were assessed and monitored for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for skin conditions non-pressure related(Resident 100), failed to administer medications according to physician's orders related to not following parameters for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident 44), and failed to identify and assess a resident's edema (swelling) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for edema. (Resident 250)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Podiatrist's recommendations were followed related to thick, painful, and fungal toenails for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for ADLs (activities of daily living). (Resident 40)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a splint was ordered and in place as recommended by therapy for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for limited range of motion (ROM). (Resident 40)
Inspectors wroteBased on random observations, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a suprapubic foley catheter (urinary catheter that is inserted into the bladder from a small cut in the lower abdomen) bag and tubing was kept off the floor for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for urinary catheters. (Resident 22)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure enteral tube feedings were infusing at the correct time and flow rate through a peg tube (a tube inserted directly into the stomach for nutrition) for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for tube feeding. (Residents 2 and 251)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was set at the correct flow rate and ordered by the physician for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Residents 13, 251, and 254)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to post the daily staffing sheet which indicated how many staff were working in the facility and the facility census in a timely manner. This had the potential to affect the 50 residents who resided in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Physician's Orders for monitoring an external cardiac device were followed for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for specialty care. (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control guidelines were in place and implemented, including those to prevent and/or contain COVID-19, related to personal protective equipment (PPE) not worn before entering a COVID-19 positive resident room, droplet/contact isolation room, and hand hygiene not completed before donning PPE, for random observations for infection control on 1 of 3 units observed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% for 2 of 4 residents observed during medication pass. Four errors were observed during 27 opportunities for errors during medication administration. This resulted in a medication error rate of 14.8%. (Residents E and F)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy services were provided for a resident, related to a scheduled pain medication not provided as ordered, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. (Resident C)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control measures were in place and implemented, related to lack of hand hygiene during medication pass and wound care, for two random observations for infection control. (QMA 1 and LPN 1)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's pain was managed related to lack of monitoring for signs of narcotic withdrawal and medication effectiveness, lack of non-pharmacological interventions provided, and incomplete pain assessments 1 of 1 residents reviewed for pain. (Resident B)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary kitchen for food preparation related to trash behind the stove, grease on the vent hood above the stove, and dried food spillage on the steam table in 1 of 1 kitchens observed (Main Kitchen). This had the potential to affect all 46 residents who received food from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to manage medications appropriately related to administering medications as ordered, monitoring blood glucose levels prior to the administration of insulin, and monitoring blood pressures and respiratory rates for 4 of 7 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Residents 92, 18, 91 and 16)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had Physician's Orders for medications and an assessment to self-administer their own medications for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for self-administration of medication. (Residents 21 and 23)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was dependent with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) received the necessary services related to long and dirty fingernails for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for ADLs. (Resident 18)
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement an ongoing resident-centered activity program that incorporated a resident's preferences for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for activities. (Resident 21)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to monitor, assess, and obtain treatments for diabetic ulcers at the time of admission and monitor bruises for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for non-pressure ulcers. (Residents 91 and 92)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received proper treatment and care related to oxygen administration flow rate for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Residents 21 and 33)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident with complaints of pain received scheduled medication to relieve the pain for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pain. (Resident 16)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Physician was promptly notified of abnormal laboratory results for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 92)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control guidelines were in place and implemented, including those to prevent and/or contain COVID-19, related to not completing the respiratory screening assessments for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for COVID-19. (Residents 242 and 35)
22 fire safety citations on file: 10 on June 17, 2025, 3 on July 11, 2024, 9 on May 12, 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) | 3.24 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.44 | 0.67 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.83 | 3.25 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.76 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.04 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 48.1% | 45.9% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 50.0% | 40.3% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.99 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 3.41 on weekdays and 2.83 on weekends, 17% 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 3.37 in April to June 2025 to 3.24 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 | 3.24 | 0.44 | 3.41 | 2.83 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 63 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.30 | 0.45 | 3.44 | 2.95 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 62 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.23 | 0.41 | 3.37 | 2.88 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 60 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.37 | 0.51 | 3.55 | 2.90 | 0.1% | 0 of 91 | 60 |
| 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 | 4.2 | 11.0 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.7 | 3.9 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.3 | 11.9 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.4 | 3.6 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.0 | 13.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.4 | 22.2 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.9 | 10.8 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Waters of Hobart Skilled Nursing Facility, the's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (38.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
38.6% 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. 28 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. 36 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. 19 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.
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. 13 residents counted.
7.7% 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. 26 residents counted.
2.7% 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. 26 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. 10 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: JOHNSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL. CMS links this home to Infinity Healthcare Consulting, a group of 70 nursing homes averaging 2.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Johnson Memorial Hospital | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 03/01/2013 |
| Mitchell, Jarrett | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 06/01/2019 | |
| Decola, Robert | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 02/16/2019 | |
| Berkhouse, Steven | Corporate director | Individual | 10/18/2021 | |
| Dunkle, David | Corporate director | Individual | 03/01/2019 | |
| Berkhouse, Steven | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/18/2021 | |
| Dunkle, David | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2019 | |
| Miller's Health Systems Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 03/01/2013 | |
| The Waters of Hobart Skilled Nursing Facility | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Dunkle, David | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2019 |
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.