Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
The next survey window likely opens around November 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Parkview Care Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Surveyors found that multiple resident rooms and shared bathrooms had persistent urine odors, damaged flooring, debris, and cobwebs, despite daily cleaning routines. Residents expressed dissatisfaction with bathroom cleanliness and requested a deep cleaning schedule, while facility policy required maintaining a sanitary and comfortable environment.
Two residents admitted with wounds did not have immediate physician orders for wound care upon admission. One resident with multiple wounds, including a stage 2 pressure ulcer and a traumatic wound, experienced a delay in receiving specific treatment orders. Another resident with a recent above-knee amputation also lacked timely wound care orders, leading to concerns about missed dressing changes. Nursing staff confirmed that orders were not promptly obtained as required by facility policy.
The facility failed to properly store medications in four out of six medication carts, with loose pills found in the drawers of several carts, including Cherry Lane and Dogwood Lane. A bottle of water was also found in one cart. RN 5 confirmed that loose pills should not be present and should be placed in a drug buster. The facility's policy requires all medications to be securely locked and inaccessible to residents and visitors.
The facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans for several residents, leading to deficiencies in addressing their medical needs. A resident with a UTI lacked a care plan for infection and antibiotic use, while another on diuretics for edema had no plan for medication use or side effects. A resident with a treatment-resistant UTI and mobility issues also lacked appropriate care plans. Additionally, a resident on hospice care and diuretics, and another dependent on enteral feeding, were not adequately monitored or had care plans in place.
The facility failed to provide scheduled bathing and hygiene assistance to residents requiring help with ADLs. Several residents, including those with specific medical conditions like spinal muscular atrophy and COPD, did not receive showers or bed baths as per their care plans. Documentation showed numerous missed bathing opportunities, and staff cited time constraints and resident difficulty as reasons for non-compliance.
The facility failed to provide restorative nursing services to two residents with limited range of motion. One resident with spinal muscular atrophy and scoliosis did not receive planned passive ROM exercises, with documentation showing multiple days marked as 'not applicable' or 'resident refused.' Another resident with muscle weakness and dementia also missed active ROM exercises, with several days marked as 'not available' or left blank. The facility's policy required documentation of objectives and interventions, which was not consistently followed.
A facility failed to maintain an oxygen concentrator for a resident with COPD, as the filter was observed with dust on two occasions. The resident's records lacked documentation for cleaning the filter, contrary to the facility's policy requiring weekly maintenance. The DON confirmed the task should have been documented.
The facility failed to ensure complete documentation for two residents regarding falls. A resident with diabetes and COPD was found on the floor, and the neurological assessment was incomplete. Another resident with dementia and schizoaffective disorder experienced multiple falls, with missing vital signs and neuro checks. The DON confirmed that all documentation should be complete, as per the facility's Fall Management policy.
A facility failed to implement a communication process with hospice personnel, resulting in a lack of documented communication for a resident receiving hospice care. The resident's clinical record lacked a hospice care plan and documentation of communication between hospice and facility staff. Staff interviews revealed that not all were aware of the hospice provider's switch to an online portal, and access to hospice records was limited to certain staff members.
A facility failed to notify a physician and a resident's representative about changes in the resident's medical status, including new wounds and a UTI. The resident had multiple diagnoses and was dependent on staff for care. Documentation was lacking for notifying the physician and family about skin impairments and a UTI diagnosis, contrary to facility policies.
The facility failed to post accurate actual hours worked for nursing staff responsible for resident care for five out of six days during the survey period. Observations showed that the posted staffing sheets did not specify actual hours worked by LPNs, QMAs, and CNAs. The Director of Nursing confirmed the inability to determine actual hours from the sheets, contrary to the facility's policy.
Failure to Maintain Sanitary and Comfortable Resident Environment
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified that the facility failed to maintain a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents across all three units reviewed. Observations revealed strong urine odors in multiple resident bathrooms at different times of the day, as well as damaged and unclean flooring, including crumbling caulking, debris, cobwebs, and holes in linoleum. These issues were present in several shared bathrooms and resident rooms, indicating a widespread problem with cleanliness and maintenance. Interviews and record reviews further supported these findings. A housekeeper reported that resident rooms were cleaned daily, including dusting, sweeping, mopping, cleaning high-touch surfaces, removing trash, and cleaning toilets. However, resident council meeting minutes indicated ongoing dissatisfaction with the cleanliness of bathrooms, with requests for a deep cleaning schedule and specific complaints about the condition of bathroom floors. The facility's housekeeping policy required maintaining a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior, but the observed conditions did not meet these standards.
Failure to Obtain Immediate Wound Care Orders for Newly Admitted Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that newly admitted residents with wounds had immediate physician orders for wound care, as evidenced by the cases of two residents. For one resident with a history of a displaced intertrochanter fracture, chronic pain, fibromyalgia, and recent surgeries, the admission records indicated the presence of a stage 2 pressure ulcer, a third-degree burn, and a non-healing surgical wound. Although care plans and wound observation tools documented these wounds and their characteristics, there was a delay in obtaining specific physician orders for wound care upon admission. The only documented order for the right inner ankle wound was initiated several days after admission, and it was later clarified that the wound was traumatic rather than pressure-related. Another resident, admitted following a right above-knee amputation due to vascular issues, also lacked immediate wound care orders upon arrival. The resident's care plan referenced the need for treatment and weekly skin checks, and progress notes indicated the use of betadine and Kerlix on the surgical stump. However, the facility did not have physician orders for wound care at the time of admission, and the orders were only received and implemented after a delay. The resident expressed concern about the lack of timely dressing changes, which was attributed to the absence of hospital-provided wound care orders and a delay in obtaining them from the physician. Interviews with nursing staff and the DON confirmed that it was the responsibility of the admitting nurse to obtain wound care orders if not provided by the transferring facility. The facility's policies required immediate assessment and treatment in accordance with professional standards, but in these cases, there was a failure to secure timely physician orders for wound care upon admission, resulting in a deficiency related to the immediate care needs of residents with wounds.
Improper Storage of Medications in Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper storage of medications in four out of six medication carts, as observed during a survey. Loose pills were found in the drawers of the Cherry Lane Medication Cart, Dogwood Lane Cart 1, and two carts on [NAME] Lane. Specific observations included various loose pills of different shapes and colors, such as small oblong white pills, broken pieces of peach pills, and small round pink pills, among others. Additionally, a bottle of water was found in the lower drawer of the Cherry Lane Medication Cart, which was acknowledged as inappropriate by RN 3 during an interview. RN 5 confirmed that there should be no loose pills in the carts and mentioned that any loose pills should be placed in a drug buster. The facility's policy on the storage and expiration dating of medications, revised on 8/7/23, was provided by the Administrator. This policy mandates that all medications must be securely locked in a cabinet or cart that is inaccessible to residents and visitors. The presence of loose pills and inappropriate items in the medication carts indicates a failure to adhere to this policy.
Failure to Develop Comprehensive Care Plans for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans for several residents, leading to deficiencies in addressing their medical needs. Resident C, diagnosed with a urinary tract infection, was prescribed Keflex, an antibiotic, but lacked a care plan for the infection or antibiotic use. Similarly, Resident N, who was cognitively intact and required assistance for toileting, was on diuretics for edema but did not have a care plan addressing the use of these medications or monitoring for potential side effects. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the absence of these care plans. Resident L, with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation and diabetes, was being treated for a treatment-resistant urinary tract infection but lacked a care plan for the infection and antibiotic use. Additionally, there was no care plan addressing Resident L's mobility and assistance needs. Resident Z, who had a history of stroke and coronary artery disease, was taking antiplatelet and antianxiety medications but did not have corresponding care plans. The Director of Nursing indicated that a care plan for aspirin was not expected, but one for Ativan was. Resident J, receiving hospice care and diagnosed with heart failure and atrial fibrillation, was on a diuretic but lacked a care plan for its use. Resident V, dependent on enteral feeding, reported delays in feeding administration and had not been weighed since admission due to refusal, yet there was no alternative process for weight monitoring. The facility's policies on care plan development and changes in resident condition were not adequately followed, contributing to these deficiencies.
Failure to Provide Scheduled Bathing and Hygiene Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents requiring assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) were bathed or assisted to bathe as needed. Resident V, who was completely dependent on staff for bathing, expressed a desire for more frequent complete bed baths than the once-a-week schedule provided. Documentation revealed numerous dates where Resident V did not receive a complete bath or shower, with no records of refusals. Similarly, Resident P, who required supervision for transfers and preferred showers twice a week, only received three showers in the last 30 days, all on Fridays, contrary to her scheduled days. Resident S, who needed substantial assistance with hygiene, reported not receiving bed baths on scheduled days. Documentation showed several missed bed baths over several months. Resident T, who required substantial assistance and preferred hair washing with bed baths, was observed with oily hair and reported infrequent hair washing. Records indicated multiple missed showers or bed baths with hair washing over several months. LPN 7 noted that Resident T was difficult to get up, which contributed to missed showers. Resident C, who preferred showers twice a week due to eczema, often received two bed baths instead of a shower and was observed with facial stubble despite a care plan for daily shaving. Documentation showed missed showers and bed baths on scheduled days. The DON indicated that shower sheets were not part of the clinical record, and all showers should be documented in the Point of Care (POC) Tasks. The facility's ADLs policy stated that residents unable to carry out ADLs should receive necessary services to maintain hygiene, which was not consistently followed.
Failure to Provide Restorative Nursing Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide restorative nursing services to residents with limited range of motion, as evidenced by the cases of two residents. Resident V, who has contractures of all extremities and diagnoses including spinal muscular atrophy and scoliosis, reported not receiving restorative nursing services during a week in September. The care plan for Resident V included passive range of motion exercises, but documentation showed multiple days marked as 'not applicable' or 'resident refused,' with no further documentation to explain the lack of services. The clinical record lacked sufficient documentation to account for the days when restorative nursing was not provided. Similarly, Resident 35, diagnosed with muscle weakness and dementia, was also on a restorative program that included active range of motion exercises. However, the documentation for Resident 35 showed several days marked as 'not available' or left blank, indicating a failure to provide the planned restorative services. The facility's policy required measurable objectives and interventions to be documented in the care plan and medical record, but this was not consistently done. The administrator confirmed that residents care planned for restorative nursing should receive services daily unless specified otherwise in the care plan.
Failure to Maintain Oxygen Concentrator for Resident with COPD
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper maintenance of an oxygen concentrator for a resident with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), identified as Resident P. On two separate occasions, the oxygen concentrator's filter was observed to have moderate dust accumulation, indicating it had not been cleaned as required. The resident's clinical record did not include an order for cleaning the filter in the Treatment Administration Record, despite the facility's policy that required nurses to clean the filters weekly and as needed. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the task was expected to be documented, but it was not present in the resident's records.
Incomplete Documentation of Falls for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate and complete documentation for two residents regarding falls. Resident P, who has diagnoses including diabetes mellitus and COPD, was found on the floor in her room, believed to have rolled out of bed. The clinical record for Resident P lacked a completed neurological assessment following the fall, with several time slots on the neurological checklist left blank without documentation. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that a risk assessment and complete neurological checklist should have been completed after each fall event. Similarly, Resident 12, who has diagnoses including dementia disorder and schizoaffective disorder, experienced multiple falls. The neurological checklists for these falls were incomplete, with missing vital signs and neuro checks at various intervals. The DON acknowledged that all boxes on the Neurological Check List should be completed. The facility's Fall Management policy requires documentation of vital signs with any fall event, which was not adhered to in these cases.
Failure to Implement Hospice Communication Protocol
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to establish and implement a communication process with hospice personnel, which resulted in a lack of documented communication between the long-term care facility staff and the hospice provider for a resident receiving hospice care. The clinical record of Resident J, who had diagnoses including heart failure and atrial fibrillation, did not contain a care plan related to hospice services or any documentation of communication between hospice staff and facility staff. Additionally, there was no hospice medical record within the resident's clinical record. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the hospice provider had transitioned to using an online portal for documentation, but not all staff were aware of this change. The Director of Nursing (DON) indicated that unit managers and the infection prevention nurse had access to the hospice portal using her login credentials. However, if the DON was not present, staff would have to contact her or the hospice directly to access the records. The facility's hospice policy required a written communication protocol to ensure the needs of hospice patients were addressed, but this protocol was not effectively implemented or communicated to all relevant staff.
Failure to Notify Physician and Family of Resident's Medical Changes
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the physician and resident representative of changes in a resident's medical status, specifically for a resident with skin conditions and a urinary tract infection (UTI). The physician was not informed of a new wound, and the resident's representative was not notified of the new wound, new diagnosis, and new medication order. A family member discovered a dressing on the resident's foot and additional sores on various parts of the body, prompting a request for a skin assessment. Despite the family suspecting a UTI, lab work had not been returned, and antibiotics had not been started. The clinical record review revealed that the resident had multiple diagnoses, including hemiplegia, aphasia, atopic dermatitis, and a UTI. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated the resident was not assessed for cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for various needs. The facility's records lacked documentation of a care plan for the UTI and did not show that the physician or resident representative had been notified of the skin impairments. Progress notes from the nurse practitioner did not include assessments or treatments for the identified skin impairments. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that documentation of notifications to the physician and family was missing from the clinical record. The facility's policies required communication of changes in a resident's status to the appropriate practitioner and family, along with proper documentation. However, these procedures were not followed, as evidenced by the lack of notification regarding the resident's skin conditions and UTI diagnosis.
Inaccurate Posting of Nurse Staffing Hours
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to post accurate actual hours worked for licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift daily for five out of six days during the annual survey period. Observations on specific dates revealed that the posted nurse staffing data sheets did not specify the actual hours worked by staff members, including LPNs, QMAs, and CNAs. For instance, on one occasion, the sheet indicated that two LPNs worked 20 hours between 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M. without specifying the actual hours worked. Similar discrepancies were noted for QMAs and CNAs on other days. The Administrator provided copies of the posted nurse staffing sheets for several dates, all of which failed to reflect the actual hours worked. The Director of Nursing confirmed the inability to determine the actual hours worked from the posted sheets. The facility's policy, revised in July 2023, requires posting the total number and actual hours worked by nursing staff at the beginning of each shift, which was not adhered to during the survey period.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 249 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Evansville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| River Bend Nursing And Rehabilitation | 1.3 mi | — | 23 | 0 |
| Heritage Center | 1.3 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| North Park Nursing Center | 1.6 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| Envive Of River City | 1.9 mi | — | 23 | 0 |
| Brickyard Healthcare - Woodbridge Care Center | 1.9 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Parkview Care Center.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.