Search for Skilled Nursing by ZIP Code:  :

Sugar Creek Rehabilitation And Convalescent Center

  1. Home
  2. Skilled Nursing Home Facilities Directory
  3. Indiana (IN)
  4. Greenfield
Full Name

Phone Number

Email Address

City of interest
We value your privacy. By clicking, you agree to the terms and conditions of our privacy policy. You also consent that we can reach out to you using a phone system that can auto-dial numbers. Your consent is not required to use our service.

Search for nursing homes in your area

ZIP:

Photos

Reviews
Overall Rating 1.8 / 5.0 ★★★★★

  • Sophia Heady
    ★★★★★ a week ago

    I had to give this place 1 star to write this.Very corrupt. Do not work here. Do not put your family here. They don't fire employees, instead they say they are suspending you pending investigation and never call you back. They do the same things to the residents too. ????Monica and Brad the long way, two of the most corrupt employees there.

  • Daylen Oatts
    ★★★★★ a week ago

    Worked there for almost a year and sad to say i wouldnt leave my dying dog there for care, Monica from corporate is the most annoying and deceptive creature you could ever meet. 1 star only because I got high on all my lunch breaks LMFAO

  • shawntay orr
    ★★★★★ 4 months ago

    This nursing home is terrible. The people there don't care about the patients. I have so many problems with them. My mother hates it there.i came there plenty of times and people was lying on floors and dirty. They are so rude and unprofessional. I wouldn't recommend this place to anyone .

  • A Google User
    ★★★★★ 7 years ago

    Full disclosure: I am a contractor who periodically works with the facility, none of my family or friends have stayed there. That said, I need to make some corrections to previous posts: There is not nor has there been an Anita Wood with the facility. They have a new dietary manager and food service company, and the food is very good - I eat lunch here when I can as it is delicious and saves me a trip to a restaurant. The building is very clean, and is very bright and open feeling due to every hallway having huge windows opposite the rooms offering a view of lovely rural Indiana. Staff are caring, and are stay on their toes because the facility doubles as their corporate HQ - they never know when the owner will be nearby!

About Sugar Creek Rehabilitation And Convalescent Center

General Information

Legal Business NameAdams County Memorial Hospital
Ownership TypeFor Profit - Corporation
Changed Ownership In The Last 12 MonthsNo
First Accepted MedicareAugust 1, 1985 (32 years)
Capacity60
Residents51
Percent Occupied85%
Program ParticipationMedicare And Medicaid
Resident And Family CouncilsResident
In HospitalNo
Continuing Care Retirement CommunityNo
Special Focus FacilityNo
Auto Sprinkler System In Required AreasYes

Ratings for Sugar Creek Rehabilitation And Convalescent Center

Sugar Creek Rehabilitation And Convalescent Center
was reviewed by Medicare to have a rating of 1 out of 5. About Medicare Ratings
Overall Rating
Health Inspections Rating
Quality Measures Rating
Staff Rating
RN Staff Rating

Overall Ratings of Indiana Nursing Homes

Fines, Complaints, and Inspection Problems in the Past 3 Years

Compare The Number of Problems

Types of Problems at Nursing Homes

Some issues within a nursing home are much more severe than others. Medicare evaluates each problem based on 2 scales: the number of residents affected by a problem and the severity of the potential or actual harm to residents based on the problem. We have color coded the matrix below to make it easier to pick out the more severe problems. In general, orange and red issues related to the treatment of a resident are considered substandard quality of care.

  Residents Affected
Severity of the Deficiency Few Some Many
Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety J K L
Actual harm that is not immediate jeopardy G H I
No actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy D E F
No actual harm with potential for minimal harm A B C

June 24, 2016 - 17 months ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
DFewPotential for HarmComplaintProvide routine and emergency drugs through a licensed pharmacist and only under the general supervision of a licensed nurse.

February 3, 2016 - 2 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
ESomePotential for HarmHealth InspectionHave a program that investigates, controls and keeps infection from spreading.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionAssist those residents who need help with eating/drinking, grooming and personal and oral hygiene.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provide adequate supervision to prevent avoidable accidents.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionProvide care by qualified persons according to each resident's written plan of care.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionAllow residents the right to participate in the planning or revision of care and treatment.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionDevelop and implement policies for 1) screening and training employees; and the 2) prevention, identification, investigation, and reporting of any abuse, neglect, mistreatment and misappropriation of property.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionProvide housekeeping and maintenance services.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionProtect each resident from all abuse, physical punishment, and involuntary separation from others.

November 20, 2015 - 2 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
DFewPotential for HarmComplaintEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provide adequate supervision to prevent avoidable accidents.
DFewPotential for HarmComplaintGive residents proper treatment to prevent new bed (pressure) sores or heal existing bed sores.
DFewPotential for HarmComplaintAssist those residents who need help with eating/drinking, grooming and personal and oral hygiene.

Staffing Levels Per Resident per Day

Medicare determines the expected staffing time per resident per day depending on level of care the residents of Sugar Creek Rehabilitation And Convalescent Center require. It is important to compare the reported time to expected time for a single facility instead of comparing the amount of time per resident of two facilities. Learn why.

1hr 15min
2hr 10min
ReportedExpected
CNA
45min
35min
ReportedExpected
LPN
30min
1hr
ReportedExpected
RN
2hr 30min
3hr 45min
ReportedExpected
Total Nursing

This facility also provides approximately 10min per resident per WEEK of physical therapist time.

Quality Measures for Long Stay Residents

81.6%
93.8%
93.6%
93.6%
93.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
97.7%
97.8%
100.0%
97.9%
92.8%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
-
-
28.6%
27.3%
49.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
* The data for this facility for some quarters is unavailable.
Percentage of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
15.0%
9.5%
17.8%
13.0%
22.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antianxiety or hypnotic medication
41.2%
43.9%
25.2%
15.3%
18.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
27.6%
33.3%
34.5%
34.5%
15.9%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
34.3%
36.8%
38.5%
24.4%
16.7%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
0.0%
0.0%
2.5%
0.0%
6.6%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
9.3%
9.3%
11.1%
6.4%
7.6%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
0.0%
0.0%
3.4%
6.9%
6.1%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of high risk long-stay residents with pressure ulcers
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
4.8%
8.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
2.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.9%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
4.7%
6.7%
4.3%
4.3%
3.6%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
2.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder
0.0%
0.0%
2.2%
0.0%
0.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of long-stay residents who were physically restrained

Quality Measures for Short Stay Residents

87.0%
82.8%
82.8%
84.6%
81.1%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
-
86.2%
86.7%
86.7%
80.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
* The data for this facility for some quarters is unavailable.
Percentage of short-stay residents who were assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
-
-
-
-
63.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
* The data for this facility for some quarters is unavailable.
Percentage of short-stay residents who made improvements in function
-
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
15.7%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
* The data for this facility for some quarters is unavailable.
Percentage of short-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
-
-
-
-
2.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
* The data for this facility for some quarters is unavailable.
Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.0%
4.2%
9.3%
5.6%
1.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016IN
Percentage of short-stay residents with pressure ulcers that are new or worsened



Some page content retrieved from Google Places