HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Hickory Creek at New Castle has a Trust Grade of C, which means it is average-neither great nor terrible. It ranks #251 out of 505 nursing homes in Indiana, placing it in the top half of facilities in the state, and #4 out of 7 in Henry County, indicating that only three local options are better. However, the facility is facing challenges as its performance has worsened, increasing from 2 issues in 2024 to 8 in 2025. While the nursing home has no fines on record, which is a positive sign, it struggles with staffing, earning only 1 out of 5 stars, and has a concerning 71% turnover rate, significantly higher than the state average. Additionally, RN coverage has been inconsistent, with reports showing that the facility failed to provide the required eight hours of RN coverage on multiple days, which could impact the quality of care for residents. On a positive note, quality measures received a perfect score of 5 out of 5, indicating that the overall health outcomes for residents are excellent despite these staffing and compliance issues.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Indiana
- #251/505
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 71% turnover. Very high, 23 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Indiana facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 28 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Indiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Indiana average (3.1)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
25pts above Indiana avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
23 points above Indiana average of 48%
The Ugly 18 deficiencies on record
Aug 2025
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from verbal and mental abuse by a staff member to where the resident exhibited behaviors such as irritability an...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0740
(Tag F0740)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to administer Resident B's psychotropic medications as ordered and failed to implement Resident D's behavioral care plan for management of beh...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0745
(Tag F0745)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to determine residents' ability to consent and establish individualized resident-centered care plans for a resident-to-resident relationships ...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2025
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to promote dignity by ensuring residents were changed in a timely manner after episodes of incontinence for 2 of 2 residents rev...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. The clinical record for Resident 21 was reviewed on 5/6/2025 at 11:45 a.m. The medical diagnoses included schizophrenia and chronic kidney disease.
A Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 3/11/2025, ind...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide incontinent care in a timely manner for a resident dependent on staff for toileting needs for 1 of 4 residents review...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow policy for a resident who utilized an electronic cigarette and was on oxygen for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for accident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide eight consecutive hours of registered nurse (RN) coverage daily for 2 of 30 days reviewed. This deficient practice had the protenti...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement care plans for the utilization of oxybutynin and NicoDerm for Resident 7, dementia medication for Resident 13, and ir...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure there was Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 14 of 31 days reviewed. T...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0557
(Tag F0557)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to maintain a dignified environment for a resident requested assistance with care for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident 4).
Finding...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide fresh ice water daily for 1 of 1 resident's reviewed for hydration (Resident 20).
Finding include:
During an observati...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2.) During an interview with Resident 4 on 3/21/23 at 1:55 p.m., indicated the facility did not have care plan meetings with her and her family.
Review of the record of Resident 4 on 3/23/23 at 1:05 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
The clinical record for Resident 2 was reviewed on 3/23/2023 at 12:08 p.m. The medical diagnoses included intracranial injury and convulsions.
An Annual Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 2/7/2023, i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide eight hours of consecutive registered nurse (RN) coverage for 5 of 30 days reviewed for RN coverage.
Findings include:
As worked n...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
2. The clinical record for Resident 23 was reviewed on 3/22/2023 at 2:34 p.m. The medical diagnoses included dementia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
A Significant Change of Condition Asse...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Data
(Tag F0851)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure they accurately reported licensed nursing hours for 14 of 91 days of payroll based journal data reviewed.
Findings include:
Payroll ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to maintain refrigerator/freezer temperature logs to ensure food was stored at a appropriate temperature and failed to maintain temperature log...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Indiana facilities.
- • 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • Grade C (55/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 71% turnover. Very high, 23 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
About This Facility
What is Hickory Creek At New Castle's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Indiana, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Hickory Creek At New Castle Staffed?
CMS rates HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 71%, which is 25 percentage points above the Indiana average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at Hickory Creek At New Castle?
State health inspectors documented 18 deficiencies at HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE during 2023 to 2025. These included: 18 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Hickory Creek At New Castle?
HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility is operated by AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 36 certified beds and approximately 33 residents (about 92% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in NEW CASTLE, Indiana.
How Does Hickory Creek At New Castle Compare to Other Indiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Indiana, HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (71%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Hickory Creek At New Castle?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's high staff turnover rate and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Hickory Creek At New Castle Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Indiana. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Hickory Creek At New Castle Stick Around?
Staff turnover at HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE is high. At 71%, the facility is 25 percentage points above the Indiana average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Hickory Creek At New Castle Ever Fined?
HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Hickory Creek At New Castle on Any Federal Watch List?
HICKORY CREEK AT NEW CASTLE is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.