How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
776 N Union St, Westfield, IN 46074 (opens Google Maps) · Hamilton County · (317) 896-2515· 106 certified beds · avg 86 residents/day · certified since Jul 27, 1983 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
Part of chain: AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES (90 facilities, chain avg rating 3.9★)
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · how star ratings work →
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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 5, 2026 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 20, 2023 · 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 (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Sep 12, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)
Showing the latest 3 of 21 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint F-0600
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. F-0684
The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. F-0757
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Sep 16, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Sep 16, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| Sep 16, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0880 |
| Oct 18, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · from a complaint · F-0693 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0657 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0761 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Aug 29, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0755 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0690 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0695 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0761 |
| Oct 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0880 |
| Sep 20, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (4 → 3).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 11 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 6 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Indiana avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.23 | 3.42 | 3.95 | bottom 47% in Indiana; bottom 23% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.58 | 0.62 | 0.69 | top 46% in Indiana; bottom 49% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.75 | 3.01 | 3.50 | bottom 39% in Indiana; bottom 18% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.46 | 0.47 | 0.48 | top 40% in Indiana; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 56.3 | 45.9 | 45.8 | bottom 20% in Indiana; bottom 22% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 33.3 | 40.4 | 42.9 | top 35% in Indiana; top 33% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — 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 3.37, RN 0.61, weekend 2.88.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.37 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Maple Park Village. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
Government - County
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| American Senior Communities LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2006 |
| American Senior Communities LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/05/2026 |
| Babcock, Paul | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/30/2020 |
| Dice, Mark | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2023 |
| Dice, Mark | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2023 |
| Garcia, Tralene | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2023 |
| Horn, Brenda | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2023 |
| Patel, Keeshan | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/13/2026 |
| Patel, Keeshan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/05/2026 |
| Pike, James | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2019 |
| Pike, James | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/05/2026 |
| Van Camp, Steven | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2023 |
| Van Camp, Steven | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2023 |
All 13 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain American Senior Communities — 90 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 89 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wellbrooke of Westfield | 1.0 mi | Westfield, IN | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Bridgewater Healthcare Center | 3.6 mi | Carmel, IN | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Harbour Manor Health & Living Community | 5.1 mi | Noblesville, IN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Copper Trace Health & Living Community | 5.4 mi | Westfield, IN | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Majestic Care of Carmel | 5.5 mi | Carmel, IN | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Riverwalk Village | 5.6 mi | Noblesville, IN | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Restoracy of Carmel | 5.7 mi | Carmel, IN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| McGivney Health Care Center | 5.9 mi | Carmel, IN | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Wellbrooke of Carmel | 6.1 mi | Carmel, IN | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Barrington of Carmel, the | 6.2 mi | Carmel, IN | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Carmel Health & Living Community | 6.5 mi | Carmel, IN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Retreat at the Stratford, the | 6.8 mi | Carmel, IN | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Hamilton, IN — 17 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 155199.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details