RENSSELAER CARE CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Rensselaer Care Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. With a state rank of #378 out of 505 facilities in Indiana, they fall in the bottom half, making them one of the less favorable options in the state. The facility's trend is worsening, as they went from 13 issues in 2024 to 14 in 2025, signaling ongoing problems. Staffing is a notable weakness, with a rating of 2 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 55%, which is higher than the state average. Additionally, the facility has incurred $128,311 in fines, which is concerning and suggests repeated compliance issues, while RN coverage is less than 89% of Indiana facilities, indicating potential gaps in care. Several alarming incidents have been reported, including a critical failure to provide ground meat to a resident on a specialized diet, resulting in the resident's death due to choking. Additionally, another incident highlighted the lack of adequate supervision for a cognitively impaired resident during meals, which also led to a fatal outcome. Furthermore, there were deficiencies in the kitchen regarding food safety, with unclean conditions and improperly stored food observed, potentially affecting many residents. While the quality measures received a perfect score of 5 out of 5, these strengths are overshadowed by serious weaknesses in health inspections and overall care.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Indiana
- #378/505
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 55% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $128,311 in fines. Lower than most Indiana facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 22 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Indiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 39 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
Below Indiana average (3.1)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Near Indiana avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
7 points above Indiana average of 48%
The Ugly 39 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
8 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
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure treatments for pressure ulcers were completed as ordered by the physician for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. (Reside...
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
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a respiratory treatment was monitored for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for oxygen. (Resident B)Finding includes:During ra...
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's record was accurate, related to an Agency LPN signing that a treatment had been completed when the treatment had not be...
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 F0940
(Tag F0940)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure contracted staff training requirements were completed for Medication Administration for 3 of 6 Agency Staff reviewed for agency orie...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure grievances voiced by the residents were resolved or attempted to be resolved in a timely manner and failed to follow up on the resol...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 F0800
(Tag F0800)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided choices and the choices were honored for meals, for 9 of 11 residents interviewed. (Residents H, K, L, M, N,...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to serve 1 of 2 meals observed at an appetizing temperature, related to a supper meal served with temperatures of the food under ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to serve, store, and prepare food under sanitary conditi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2025
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0554
(Tag F0554)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had Physician's Orders for medications and an assessment to self-administer their own medications for 1 of 1...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0676
(Tag F0676)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's ADL (activities of daily living) functions were maintained related to walking the resident daily as care p...
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received the necessary care and servi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's range of motion (ROM) was maintain...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to monitor nutritional intake for meals for a resident with a history ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received the necessary respiratory care and treatments related to medications not initiated for a resident wi...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
2 deficiencies
2 IJ (1 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided to prevent a cognitively-impaired resident on the Memory Care Unit with a history of food stuffing...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(K)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure ground meat was provided in accordance with the physician orders and failed to ensure specialized dietary instructions ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
11 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Requirements
(Tag F0622)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident and/or their responsible party were notified in w...
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
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement a care plan for a resident with a history of wandering into other resident's room, for 1 of 21 resident...
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure ADL (activities of daily living) care was provided to a dependent resident, related to showering as scheduled, for 1 of 3 residents ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
3. On 2/19/24 at 9:51 a.m., a dark purple discoloration was observed on Resident 27's left arm and right hand.
On 2/23/24 at 11:45 a.m., Resident 27 was observed with a dark purple mark on the right ...
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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure safety measures were in place to prevent accidents, related to fall precautions not implemented for a resident with a ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff monitored output from a foley catheter every shift per the care plan, for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for catheters. (Resident 2...
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 F0744
(Tag F0744)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure continuous effective interventions were implem...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored properly and with appropriate labeling, for 1 of 4 medication carts observed. (South Cart 1)
F...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. On 2/22/24 at 9:37 a.m., the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) performed a wound care treatment for Resident 22. The ADON prepared her supplies wearing clean gloves. She removed the gloves, and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to promote antibiotic stewardship by ensuring appropriate use of antibiotic therapy and reduce antibiotic resistance by only initiating therap...
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 observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary kitchen, related to boxes of food stored on the freezer floor and clean dishes stored upright on a shelf, for 1 of 1 kitche...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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 F0802
(Tag F0802)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure there was sufficient qualified dietary staff available to cook meals. This had the potential to affect 66 residents who received mea...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to have accurate and complete daily nurse staffing postings. This had the potential to affect all 67 residents residing in the facility.
Finding...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment was clean and in good repair relate...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to notify a resident of ultrasound results for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for notification of change. (Resident 49)
Finding inclu...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to implement a baseline care plan related to skin conditi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received the necessary treatment and...
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
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a urinary tract infection (UTI) received the necessary treatment and services related to completing a laboratory tes...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0697
(Tag F0697)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident who had complained of pain during th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure each resident's medication regimen was managed and monitored...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared in form to meet individual needs related to incorrectly made pureed food. This had the potential to a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a comfortable and homelike environment related to bare walls, lack of personalization and no baseboards on the memory care unit. This...
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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary kitchen was maintained related to not monitoring the chemical sanitizer level of the low temperature dishwa...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), $128,311 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 39 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $128,311 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Indiana. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (6/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Rensselaer's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns RENSSELAER CARE CENTER an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Indiana, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Rensselaer Staffed?
CMS rates RENSSELAER CARE CENTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 55%, which is 9 percentage points above the Indiana average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 56%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Rensselaer?
State health inspectors documented 39 deficiencies at RENSSELAER CARE CENTER during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 36 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Rensselaer?
RENSSELAER CARE CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 81 residents (about 68% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in RENSSELAER, Indiana.
How Does Rensselaer Compare to Other Indiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Indiana, RENSSELAER CARE CENTER's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (55%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Rensselaer?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Rensselaer Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, RENSSELAER CARE CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Indiana. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Rensselaer Stick Around?
Staff turnover at RENSSELAER CARE CENTER is high. At 55%, the facility is 9 percentage points above the Indiana average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 56%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. 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 Rensselaer Ever Fined?
RENSSELAER CARE CENTER has been fined $128,311 across 1 penalty action. This is 3.7x the Indiana average of $34,362. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.
Is Rensselaer on Any Federal Watch List?
RENSSELAER CARE CENTER 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.