Indiana ›Washington

Hillside Manor Nursing Home

1109 E National Highway, Washington, IN 47501 · Daviess County · 48 certified beds · avg 34 residents/day · certified since Sep 27, 2002

SFF Candidate

Part of chain: MAJOR HOSPITAL (6 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$12,740
Fines, last 3 years
3.20
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Sep 8, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.

Corrected: Sep 22, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · May 19, 2026 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jun 5, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (57)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
May 19, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint
Mar 24, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint
Dec 10, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing.
Dec 10, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides were properly trained — aides working more than 4 months must be trained and competent, and newer aides must be enrolled in training.
Dec 10, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service.
Dec 10, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Dec 10, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Dec 10, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program.
Dec 10, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Dec 10, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's activities program was not run by a qualified professional. The person directing recreation and social activities must have proper training or credentials.
Dec 10, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Dec 10, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
Dec 10, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows.
Dec 10, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not verify that its nurse aides had completed their required training, or did not retrain aides who had been out of nurse aide work for 2 years.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective.
Dec 10, 2025C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day.
Sep 8, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Sep 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Sep 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint
Jun 25, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Sep 4, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies.
Sep 4, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program.
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences.
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Sep 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Sep 4, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate.
Sep 4, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required.
Sep 4, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Sep 4, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Sep 4, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Sep 4, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop, carry out, or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members.
Mar 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety. · from a complaint
Mar 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Dec 15, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Sep 22, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Sep 22, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate.
Sep 22, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
Sep 22, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Sep 22, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Sep 22, 2023C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (18 → 24).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202370E
2024200F
2025281J ▲
202621G ▲

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

1 fine totaling $12,740.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jun 25, 2025Fine$12,740

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityIndiana avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.203.423.95bottom 44% in Indiana; bottom 21% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.550.620.69bottom 49% in Indiana; bottom 45% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.083.013.50top 36% in Indiana; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.450.470.48top 43% in Indiana; top 40% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)51.945.945.8bottom 30% in Indiana; bottom 32% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)0.040.442.9—

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.18, RN 0.55, weekend 3.06. Staffing rating: 2/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Claxton, RyanIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/27/2025
Claxton, RyanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/27/2025
Claxton, RyanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/27/2025
Helm Chapman, JulieIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2013
Helm Chapman, JulieIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/05/2025
Hillside Manor, INC.OrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2013
Holsopple, MerleIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2013
Holsopple, MerleIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2013

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Prairie Village Nursing and Rehabilitation0.6 miWashington, IN★★★★☆3/5
Eastgate Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation0.8 miWashington, IN★★★★★5/5
Villages at Oak Ridge, the1.5 miWashington, IN★★★☆☆3/5
Amber Manor Care Center13.0 miPetersburg, IN★★★★★4/5
Brickyard Healthcare - Petersburg Care Center13.4 miPetersburg, IN★★★★☆3/5
Poplar Care Strategies13.6 miLoogootee, IN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Aperion Care Vincennes14.2 miVincennes, IN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Bertha D Garten Ketcham Memorial Center16.3 miOdon, IN★★★☆☆3/5
Freelandville Community Home16.8 miFreelandville, IN★★★☆☆3/5
Bridgepointe Health Campus18.8 miVincennes, IN★★★★☆3/5
Sycamore Care Strategies19.0 miLoogootee, IN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Lodge of the Wabash19.6 miVincennes, IN★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Washington →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 155708.