How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Waters of Georgetown, the
1002 Sister Barbara Way, Georgetown, IN 47122 (opens Google Maps) · Floyd County · (812) 940-5100· 68 certified beds · avg 58 residents/day · certified since Sep 25, 2008 · 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 →
Part of chain: INFINITY HEALTHCARE CONSULTING (69 facilities, chain avg rating 2.0★)
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jun 16, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.05
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 40 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint F-0725
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
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
View all 40 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
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 30, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Mar 30, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 30, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Mar 30, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Mar 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Sep 26, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Sep 26, 2025 | 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 |
| Sep 26, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0690 |
| Sep 26, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint · F-0867 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The 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. · F-0727 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Jun 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 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | 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. · F-0755 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| May 15, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Mar 27, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Mar 27, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 27, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Mar 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Mar 27, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0690 |
| Mar 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. · from a complaint · F-0691 |
| Mar 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · from a complaint · F-0759 |
| Dec 31, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · from a complaint · F-0679 |
| Dec 31, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Dec 31, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. · from a complaint · F-0636 |
| Dec 31, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Jun 28, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 16, 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Dec 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Apr 26, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Apr 26, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Apr 26, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Apr 26, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| Apr 26, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Apr 26, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. · F-0886 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (1 → 9).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 22
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 22 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 5 | 0 | F |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityIndiana averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.05
Indiana average: 3.42
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.39
Indiana average: 0.62
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.87
Indiana average: 3.01
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 5.05 | 3.42 | 3.95 | top 3% in Indiana; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.39 | 0.62 | 0.69 | bottom 14% in Indiana; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.87 | 3.01 | 3.50 | top 2% in Indiana; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.33 | 0.47 | 0.48 | bottom 30% in Indiana; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 59.6 | 45.9 | 45.8 | bottom 14% in Indiana; bottom 17% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 66.7 | 40.4 | 42.9 | bottom 12% in Indiana; bottom 15% 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 5.58, RN 0.43, weekend 5.38.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.58 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Waters of Georgetown, the. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
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.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Smith, Kimberly | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| Smith, Scott | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| Sprunger, Kyle | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| Wheeler, Dane | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
All 4 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Infinity Healthcare Consulting — 69 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.
- Waters of Greencastle, the — Greencastle, IN · overall 2/5
- Waters of Hartford City Skilled Nursing Facility — Hartford City, IN · overall 5/5
- Waters of Hobart Skilled Nursing Facility, the — Hobart, IN · overall 1/5
- Waters of Huntingburg, the — Huntingburg, IN · overall 2/5
- Waters of Huntington Skilled Nursing Facility, the — Huntington, IN · overall 2/5
- Waters of Indianapolis, the — Indianapolis, IN · overall 2/5abuse
- Waters of Lagrange Skilled Nursing Facility, the — Lagrange, IN · overall 2/5
- Waters of Lebanon, the — Lebanon, IN · overall 1/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 68 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
- "Can I see this month's activities calendar, and what do you offer residents who can't leave their rooms?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 60% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 48 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Villages at Historic Silvercrest the | 5.9 mi | New Albany, IN | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Woods Health Campus | 6.7 mi | New Albany, IN | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Green Valley Care Center | 6.8 mi | New Albany, IN | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Lincoln Hills of New Albany | 6.9 mi | New Albany, IN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Rolling Hills Healthcare Center | 8.9 mi | New Albany, IN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Wedgewood Healthcare Center | 9.5 mi | Clarksville, IN | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Signature Healthcare at Summerfield Rehab & Wellne | 10.0 mi | Louisville, KY | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Clark Rehabilitation and Skilled Nursing Center | 10.3 mi | Clarksville, IN | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Charlestown Place at New Albany | 10.5 mi | New Albany, IN | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Signature Healthcare at Rockford Rehab & Wellness | 10.6 mi | Louisville, KY | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Westminster Village Kentuckiana | 10.6 mi | Clarksville, IN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Riverview Village | 10.6 mi | Clarksville, IN | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 155770.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).