Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around December 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Franklin Meadows during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with nicotine dependence was not allowed to continue her preferred chewing tobacco use after returning from hospitalization. Her record included a care plan and physician documentation permitting chewing tobacco, but the DON stated the tobacco was removed because there was no current order, and the resident refused the offered nicotine patch.
Advance Directive Not Updated to Match POST Form: A cognitively intact resident’s chart continued to show full code status even though a completed POST form signed by the resident and physician designated DNR. The resident said she had changed her preference and provided the DNR paperwork to the facility, but the home screen, physician orders, and care plan were not updated to reflect the current code status.
TB Skin Test Results Not Documented: A resident with Alzheimer's disease had a two-step Mantoux TB screening series after admission, but the EHR did not show a negative or positive read for either test. The DON and RNC confirmed that both TB skin tests lacked documented results, despite orders to read each test and a facility TB control policy requiring admission screening and documentation.
Failure to Document and Provide Pneumococcal Vaccination: A resident with Alzheimer's disease and signed consent for pneumococcal vaccination had no pneumococcal vaccine documented in the chart. The DON and RNC stated the resident should have received an appropriate vaccine near admission, and the facility's policy required admission screening and offering the vaccine when consent and criteria were met.
Failure to offer and document COVID-19 vaccinations on admission affected two residents with Alzheimer's disease who were age [AGE] or older. One resident consented to be offered the vaccine but had no COVID-19 vaccination record in the EHR, and another resident with prior outside vaccinations also consented to be offered additional doses/boosters per CDC guidance, yet the record review showed the facility did not administer the appropriate vaccination or booster close to admission as expected by the DNS and RNC.
A facility failed to report a sexual abuse allegation with sufficient detail to the state health department. A cognitively intact resident admitted to performing oral sex on a moderately impaired resident without consent. The initial report omitted key details, including the residents' cognitive statuses and the police investigation's status. The facility lacked a policy for reporting to the state agency.
The facility failed to provide written Notice of Transfer and Discharge to two residents, their representatives, and the Ombudsman. Both residents were transferred to the hospital without documented notification, as confirmed by the Corporate Nurse Consultant. The facility's policy requires such notifications, but it was not followed.
The facility failed to provide written bed hold notifications to two residents or their representatives during facility-initiated transfers to the hospital. Both residents, with conditions such as COPD and congestive heart failure, were transferred without documented notification of the bed hold policy, as required by the facility's policy.
A facility failed to accurately complete an MDS assessment for a resident with type 2 diabetes mellitus, who had missing bottom front teeth and ill-fitting partial dentures. The MDS assessment incorrectly stated the resident had no dentures or partials. Interviews revealed that an oral exam should have been conducted during admission, and the facility lacked a specific MDS assessment policy, relying instead on the RAI manual.
A facility failed to refer a resident for a Level II PASRR evaluation after a new diagnosis of psychoactive disorder. The resident's clinical record showed the diagnosis was made, but no referral was completed. The DON confirmed the oversight, which was against the facility's PASRR policy requiring updates with significant changes in mental status.
A facility failed to maintain proper documentation in a hospice communication binder for a resident receiving hospice services due to bladder cancer. The binder, intended to ensure communication between the facility and hospice staff, lacked necessary documentation such as consents and nursing notes. Both the RN and DNS were unaware of this deficiency, despite existing policies and agreements requiring coordination and communication.
The facility failed to administer pneumococcal vaccinations according to CDC guidelines for two residents who had consented to receive them. One resident, with multiple chronic conditions, had received a PCV13 vaccine but lacked documentation for a PPSV vaccine. Another resident, also with chronic conditions, had no documentation of receiving any pneumococcal vaccine. The DON acknowledged the oversight, and the facility's policy claimed adherence to CDC guidelines, which were not followed.
Resident’s Chewing Tobacco Preference Not Honored
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident with nicotine dependence could continue her preferred use of chewing tobacco, despite the resident’s stated preference and existing documentation supporting that choice. The resident stated during interview that the facility took her chew away and that she had always liked to chew. The clinical record showed a diagnosis of nicotine dependence, a care plan allowing chewing tobacco per preference, a physician’s order stating she may have chewing tobacco per facility policy, and a progress note indicating she continued to use chewing tobacco and declined cessation. The Director of Nursing stated that after the resident returned from a recent hospitalization, the chewing tobacco was removed from her room because there was no doctor’s order for continued tobacco use, and the facility offered a nicotine patch, which the resident refused.
Advance Directive Not Updated to Match POST Form
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident’s advance directive preference was accurately documented in the clinical record for 1 of 8 residents reviewed. Resident 2’s Quarterly MDS, dated 8/13/25, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The electronic clinical record home screen listed the resident as full code, and physician orders dated 1/3/25 also indicated full code status with no end date. The care plan, initiated 1/10/25, stated the resident/legal guardian preferred full code status and that the preference would be honored. A completed Indiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form was later provided by the Corporate Nurse Consultant and showed that Resident 2 and the attending physician signed and dated the form on 8/12/25. The POST form designated the resident’s code status as Do Not Attempt Resuscitation/DNR, and the form had been uploaded into the electronic clinical record on 8/22/25. No subsequent POST form was provided, yet the clinical record was not updated to reflect the resident’s DNR preference. The Social Services Director and DON both stated they were unaware the code status had changed from full code to DNR, and the resident stated she had changed her preferred code status and the DNR paperwork had been provided to the facility.
TB Skin Test Results Not Documented
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to read the results of a two-step Mantoux skin test series for Resident 80 after administering both TB skin tests. Resident 80, who had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and was admitted on 2/13/25, had a first-step TB test upon admission with an order to read the result on 2/16/25, but the electronic health record did not show whether the test was read as negative or positive. The resident also received a second-step TB test on 2/28/25 with an order to read the result on 3/2/25, and the record likewise did not indicate a negative or positive reading. During interview, the DNS and RNC stated that both TB skin tests lacked a documented result read and that the electronic health record should have included a negative or positive result after each administration. The facility policy titled Tuberculosis Control Program, dated January 2022, stated that residents are to be screened upon admission for prevention and control of TB infections, including appropriate documentation of TB screening.
Failure to Document and Provide Pneumococcal Vaccination
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow current pneumococcal vaccination administration guidelines for a resident who had consented to receive vaccinations. Resident 8, who had an admission date of 7/5/25 and was of age [AGE] or older, had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and a preventative health section in the electronic health record that lacked documentation of any pneumococcal vaccinations. The resident's record was reviewed on 9/11/25, and no pneumococcal vaccine history was documented. On 9/12/25, the Director of Nursing Services provided pneumococcal vaccination consent forms showing the resident signed consent on 7/10/25 and indicated consent to receive pneumococcal vaccine(s) per CDC recommendations. During interview on 9/15/25, the DNS and Regional Nurse Consultant stated the resident's record lacked pneumococcal vaccinations and that the resident should have received an appropriate vaccine close to the time of admission. The facility's policy, reviewed in December 2024, stated residents are to be screened on admission for pneumococcal vaccinations and offered vaccination if consent is signed and criteria are met. CDC adult pneumococcal guidance updated 7/2/25 indicated that adults [AGE] years of age or older with unknown vaccination history or no previous pneumococcal vaccinations should receive a dose of PCV 20 or PCV 21.
Failure to Offer and Document COVID-19 Vaccinations on Admission
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to administer COVID-19 vaccinations upon admission for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for immunization records. One resident had an admission date of 7/5/25, was age [AGE] or older, had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, and signed a COVID-19 vaccine consent form on 7/10/25 indicating a wish to be offered COVID-19 vaccinations per CDC recommendations. The resident's preventative health section in the electronic health record lacked records for any COVID-19 vaccinations. Another resident had an admission date of 2/13/25, was age [AGE] or older, had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, and had two historical COVID-19 vaccinations documented from an outside care setting prior to admission. The resident's responsible party signed a COVID-19 vaccine consent form on 2/18/25 indicating the resident wished to be offered COVID-19 vaccinations per CDC recommendations. During interview, the DNS and RNC stated each resident should have received the appropriate vaccination or booster close to the time of admission. The facility policy stated residents are to be offered COVID-19 vaccinations on admission based on vaccination history and should be offered additional doses and boosters per CDC recommendations.
Inadequate Reporting of Sexual Abuse Allegation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of sexual abuse with sufficient information to the state health department. The incident involved a female resident, Resident C, who was moderately cognitively impaired and had a guardian, and a male resident, Resident B, who was cognitively intact. Resident C reported that Resident B entered her room, pulled down her pants, and performed oral sex on her without her consent. The facility's initial incident report did not include critical details such as Resident B's cognitive status, his admission of performing oral sex, Resident C's lack of consent, and the fact that the police investigation was handed over to the county prosecutor's office. The incident was initially reported by a CNA who found Resident B with his head toward Resident C's groin. The Director of Nursing, Administrator, and family were notified, and the residents were separated. Resident B was placed on one-on-one supervision, and Resident C was moved to a different unit. However, the facility's report lacked comprehensive information necessary for the state health department to assess the severity of the allegation. Additionally, the facility was unable to provide a policy regarding reporting to the state agency prior to the survey exit.
Failure to Provide Transfer and Discharge Notices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the required written Notice of Transfer and Discharge to two residents, their representatives, and the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman. Resident 34, diagnosed with COPD and chronic cholecystitis, was transferred to the hospital emergency department on a facility-initiated transfer. However, there was no documentation in the clinical record indicating that the written notice was provided to the resident, their representative, or the Ombudsman. Similarly, Resident 90, who had diagnoses including COPD, kidney disease, and diabetes, was also transferred to the hospital emergency department on a facility-initiated transfer. The clinical record for Resident 90 similarly lacked documentation of the written notice being provided to the resident, their representative, or the Ombudsman. During an interview, the Corporate Nurse Consultant confirmed the absence of verification for the notification, and the Director of Nursing Services provided a copy of the facility's policy, which mandates such notifications, indicating a failure to adhere to the policy.
Failure to Provide Bed Hold Notifications During Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide written bed hold notifications to two residents, Resident 34 and Resident 90, or their representatives, during facility-initiated transfers to the hospital. Resident 34, who had diagnoses including COPD, congestive heart failure, and atrial fibrillation, was transferred to the hospital emergency department on April 22, 2024. The clinical record for Resident 34 lacked documentation of the written bed hold notification being provided at the time of transfer. Similarly, Resident 90, with diagnoses including COPD, type 1 diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure, was transferred to the hospital emergency department on July 31, 2024. The clinical record for Resident 90 also lacked documentation of the written bed hold notification being provided. During an interview, the Corporate Nurse Consultant confirmed the absence of verification that the notifications were given. The facility's current bed hold policy, dated November 2017, requires that the resident and their representative be provided with the bed hold policy at the time of transfer, and that this notification be documented.
Inaccurate MDS Assessment for Resident's Dental Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the accuracy of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for a resident reviewed for dental care. The resident, who had a diagnosis including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was observed on two occasions to have no bottom front teeth and reported having ill-fitting partial dentures that were not documented in the MDS assessment. The admission MDS assessment inaccurately indicated that the resident had no dentures or partials. Interviews with the MDS Coordinator and the Director of Nursing revealed that the assessment should have noted the missing bottom front teeth and that an oral exam should have been conducted during the resident's admission assessment. The facility did not have a specific policy for the MDS assessment and relied on the RAI manual, which requires a comprehensive assessment upon admission and annually, including examining dentures or partials for loose fit.
Failure to Refer Resident for Level II PASRR Evaluation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident was referred to the State-designated authority contractor for a Level II Pre-Admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) following a new mental health diagnosis. Resident 80, who was reviewed for PASRR compliance, received a new diagnosis of psychoactive disorder on June 18, 2024. However, the facility did not complete a referral for a Level II PASRR evaluation as required. During an interview, the Director of Nursing acknowledged that the referral was not completed and should have been updated after the new diagnosis. The facility's PASRR policy, dated November 2017, mandates that PASRR assessments be updated with significant changes in mental or physical status, which was not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Maintain Hospice Communication Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's hospice communication binder contained ongoing communication and collaboration between the facility and the hospice staff. This deficiency was identified for one of the three residents reviewed for hospice services. The hospice communication binder for Resident 8, who was receiving hospice services due to bladder cancer, lacked any documentation of services provided by the hospice staff. Despite the presence of a table of contents listing necessary documents such as consents, physician orders, and nursing notes, no actual documentation was found inside the binder. RN 3, during an interview, indicated that hospice provider employees were responsible for placing their documentation into the binder, but was unaware of the lack of documentation. The Director of Nursing Services (DNS) was also unaware that the hospice communication binder and the facility's electronic clinical record lacked the necessary hospice provider documentation. The facility had a policy in place, as well as a Nursing Facility and Hospice Services Agreement, which outlined the coordination of responsibilities and communication between the hospice company and the facility. However, the absence of documentation in the hospice communication binder indicated a failure to adhere to these established protocols, resulting in a lack of communication and collaboration regarding Resident 8's hospice care.
Failure to Administer Pneumococcal Vaccinations per CDC Guidelines
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to CDC guidelines for pneumococcal vaccination administration for two residents who had consented to receive the vaccine. Resident 41, diagnosed with unspecified dementia, chronic atrial fibrillation, type 2 diabetes, and chronic kidney disease, had received a PCV13 vaccine in 2016 but lacked documentation for a PPSV vaccine. The resident's consent form indicated a wish to receive pneumococcal vaccinations per CDC recommendations, but it was unsigned. Resident 78, diagnosed with unspecified dementia, COPD, and a history of myocardial infarction, had no documentation of receiving either a PCV or PPSV vaccine, despite a signed consent form indicating a desire to follow CDC guidelines. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the appropriate pneumococcal vaccinations should have been administered to both residents. The facility's policy, which was undated, stated that CDC guidance was followed for pneumococcal vaccine recommendations. However, the review of CDC guidelines confirmed that the residents' chronic health conditions warranted pneumococcal vaccinations, which were not administered as required.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 490 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 5 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Franklin
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Otterbein Franklin Seniorlife Comm Res & Com Care | 0.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 17 | 2 |
| Hickory Creek At Franklin | 1.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Homeview Center Of Franklin | 2.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Compass Park | 2.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 0 |
| Aspen Trace Health & Living Community | 7.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Franklin Meadows.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.