700 East 21St Avenue, Gary, IN 46407
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Overall Review of Simmons Loving Care Health Facility
Pros
The facility is nice and clean.- The staff are warm and friendly.
- The hospitality is impeccable.
- The facility is a family-owned and operated business.
- They are doing a great job.
- The facility staff is very knowledgeable about their patients.
- They know the high acuity needs of those they care for.
Cons
The staff ignored a pressure sore on the patient’s coccyx and provided no treatment.- When the wound was debrided, it was down to the bone, and the staff did nothing about it.
- The family believed this neglect contributed to the patient’s death.
- The facility has been closed for poor care and withholding treatment.
- Medicaid and Medicare refused to subsidize the facility due to numerous violations putting patients at risk.
- The facility was ranked the 24th worst out of more than 15,000 nursing homes surveyed.
- There were over a hundred documented violations of the standard of care.
- Photos allegedly showed an infected stump and exposed bone and tendons caused by the facility.
- The owner and staff were described as inconsiderate and disrespectful.
Review
This community is best avoided by families that prioritize reliable medical oversight, transparent communication, and consistent care. It is a last-resort option only for those facing severe budget constraints who can personally supervise care and demand accountability at every turn. Without that level of hands-on scrutiny, the risk of neglect and preventable harm rises sharply, making the choice imprudent for most seniors who require ongoing skilled attention.
The review history paints a troubling, consistent picture of safety and wound-care failures. Several accounts describe residents developing serious pressure injuries, with claims that necessary treatment was delayed or inadequately addressed. One painful instance involved a pressure sore that worsened to the bone; families believe such failures contributed to decline and death. Across multiple cases, Medicaid and Medicare involvement or restrictions surface, accompanied by accusations of numerous violations and a troubling pattern of risk to patients. The facility’s notoriety is underscored by mentions of settlements and participation in lawsuits, and independent assessments placed it near the bottom of national rankings among facilities surveyed.
Administrative and communication breakdowns amplify the danger. Families report difficulty reaching staff, with messages left unanswered and routine administrative tasks like income paperwork slipping through the cracks. There are chilling anecdotes about a resident being removed to a hospital without clear information provided to family, prompting law enforcement involvement to locate the person. Such gaps in oversight and responsiveness erode trust and leave families with little confidence that concerns will be addressed promptly or that information will be shared openly about a resident’s condition and needs.
Nevertheless, a few reviewers acknowledge some positive elements, noting the facility’s clean appearance and moments of warmth in staff interactions. There are mentions of staff being knowledgeable about high-acuity needs and of a family-owned, apparently well-meaning operation. Those hopeful notes feel outweighed, however, by the overwhelming weight of safety and governance concerns. The positive remarks appear to reflect isolated instances of care or a courteous demeanor, not a reliable pattern of quality, accountability, or consistent outcomes for residents with complex medical needs.
Families should consider alternatives if safety, predictability, and proactive care are priorities. Facilities with solid track records, transparent reporting, and demonstrable wound-care protocols deserve priority, especially for residents with a history of pressure injuries or elevated risk. Look for clear, frequent communication channels, readily accessible administrators, consistent staffing levels, and evidence of ongoing, skilled monitoring by qualified clinicians. A good fit will also show credible compliance histories, current licensure, and a willingness to provide current inspection reports and staffing data upon request.
The bottom-line guidance is pragmatic and decisive: if choosing, require rigorous due diligence before placing a loved one here. Demand the most recent state survey results, a tour focused on wound-care procedures and caregiver responsiveness, and candid conversations with front-line staff about daily routines, staffing ratios, and escalation protocols. Verify billing practices, inquire about how emergencies and hospital transfers are handled, and speak with current residents or families about their daily experiences. When safety, transparency, and reliable care cannot be clearly demonstrated, pursuing other options is the prudent, protective course.
46 resident community capacity
Assisted Living
Beauty salon
Cable or satellite TV
Dining room
Fully furnished
Garden
Housekeeping services
Kitchenette
Move-in coordination
Outdoor space
Telephone
Wi-Fi/high-speed internet available
24-hour call system
Activities of daily living assistance
Assistance with bathing
Assistance with dressing
Assistance with transfers
Diabetes diet
Meal preparation and service
Medication management
Mental wellness program
Special dietary restrictions
Transportation arrangement (medical)
Transportation to doctors appointments
Comprehensive Supportive Living Arrangements for Adults with Disabilities
Funding and Affording Assisted Living: A Thorough Overview
Assisted Living Expenses and Long-Term Care Insurance: A Comprehensive Exploration