Eagle Creek Healthcare Center

    4102 Shore Drive, Indianapolis, IN, 46254
    2.0 · 13 reviews
    • Assisted living
    • Skilled nursing
    AnonymousLoved one of resident
    1.0

    Dirty, neglectful facility; untrustworthy staff

    I moved my dad out quickly after a horrible, depressing stay. The place felt dirty and smelled awful (flies, grimy vents/bathrooms, dark shared rooms) and patients screamed unmonitored. Staff quality was wildly inconsistent - nights were neglectful (30+ minute call responses, meds late/not entered, inconsistent vitals, no help with showers or belongings) and there were theft/missing-item issues - yet a few (Tiffany, Samarion P., Alisha, Bridget and therapy) were excellent. Dining, activities and some morning staff were OK, but overall I do not recommend this facility.

    Pricing

    Schedule a Tour

    Amenities

    Healthcare services

    • Activities of daily living assistance
    • Assistance with bathing
    • Assistance with dressing
    • Assistance with transfers
    • Medication management

    Healthcare staffing

    • 24-hour call system
    • 24-hour supervision

    Meals and dining

    • Diabetes diet
    • Meal preparation and service
    • Special dietary restrictions

    Room

    • Air-conditioning
    • Cable
    • Fully furnished
    • Housekeeping and linen services
    • Kitchenettes
    • Private bathrooms
    • Telephone
    • Wifi

    Transportation

    • Community operated transportation
    • Transportation arrangement

    Common areas

    • Beauty salon
    • Computer center
    • Dining room
    • Fitness room
    • Gaming room
    • Garden
    • Outdoor space
    • Small library
    • Wellness center

    Community services

    • Concierge services
    • Fitness programs
    • Move-in coordination

    Activities

    • Community-sponsored activities
    • Planned day trips
    • Resident-run activities
    • Scheduled daily activities

    2.00 · 13 reviews

    Overall rating

    1. 5
    2. 4
    3. 3
    4. 2
    5. 1
    • Care

      1.7
    • Staff

      1.9
    • Meals

      2.3
    • Amenities

      1.8
    • Value

      2.0

    Pros

    • Some morning shift staff courteous and professional
    • Several individual staff praised for compassion and competence (e.g., Tiffany the D.O.N., Samarion P. CNA, Alisha nursing unit manager, Bridget the nurse)
    • Therapy department reported as great and helpful with recovery
    • Rooms described as a good size and comfortable by some reviewers
    • Clean facility and dining room noted by multiple reviewers
    • Activities available in the cafeteria
    • Safety drills conducted
    • Efficient staff and good care cited in some experiences
    • Easy entry and exit to the building
    • Facility is among the least expensive/local cheaper option
    • Responsive action in at least one instance (cushion replacement after complaint)

    Cons

    • Frequent medication errors, delays, and incomplete documentation
    • Long response times to call lights (reports of 30+ minutes)
    • Inconsistent quality between shifts, especially poor night shift performance
    • Staff described as cold, distant, rude, or cruel in multiple reports
    • Theft and missing personal items (clothing, cell phone, wheelchair cushion) with concerns about investigation and policies
    • Rooms often shared (double rooms) and privacy issues
    • No or nonfunctional call lights reported
    • Lack of basic supplies or assistance (no urinal, not assisted with belongings)
    • Poor food quality, incorrect meals, and limited fresh produce
    • Dirty bathrooms, floors, walls, A/C vents, and reports of flies
    • Strong foul odors or stench reported
    • Nighttime neglect: screaming patients, partying staff, poor supervision, and lack of sleep for residents
    • Low lighting and dark decor in rooms and common areas
    • Unattended patients left in hallways or waiting for care
    • Inconsistent vital sign and blood sugar monitoring
    • Infection risk concerns due to cleanliness and staff practices
    • Smoking while handling residents reported
    • Personal care deficiencies (no showers, nails not clipped, little exercise)
    • Lost or missing phones and poor management of resident belongings
    • Staffing shortages or operational inefficiencies implied
    • Variable and contradictory experiences between reviewers
    • Some residents described as rude or disruptive, contributing to rough environment
    • Reports of stacked dirty dishes and long wait times in dining
    • Language barriers with nurses reported
    • Skepticism that management will fully resolve issues; calls for policy revision

    Summary review

    Overall sentiment across the reviews is strongly mixed but leans toward negative, with recurring themes of inconsistent care quality, safety concerns, and operational shortcomings. Multiple reviewers describe persistent medication problems — doses not entered into the system, delayed or incomplete administration, and staff not delivering medications on schedule. These medication issues are frequently tied to slow or absent responses by staff to call lights (some citing waits of 30+ minutes), inconsistent vital sign and blood sugar monitoring, and nighttime neglect. Several reviewers explicitly described the night shift as particularly problematic, with instances of neglect, loud or disruptive behavior, and staff who appear disengaged.

    Staff performance is highly variable. A minority of reviews praise specific individuals — several named staff (Tiffany the D.O.N., Samarion P. CNA, Alisha the nursing unit manager, Bridget the nurse) and the therapy department receive strong positive mentions for compassion, competence, and helpfulness with recovery. However, many more reviews report cold, rude, or even cruel behavior from staff, describing long waits for assistance, lack of basic help with belongings, and unhelpful or dismissive attitudes. There are also alarming reports of inappropriate behavior at night (staff laughing/partying) and residents being left unsupervised, contributing to a chaotic atmosphere for some patients.

    Cleanliness and facility condition are inconsistent across accounts. Some reviewers explicitly call the facility clean, with comfortable rooms and a tidy dining area, while numerous others describe dirty bathrooms, stained floors and walls, filthy A/C vents, flies, stacked dirty dishes, and a pervasive foul stench. Rooms are mostly noted as adequately sized, but many are shared/double rooms with low light and dark decor, which some reviewers describe as depressing. Safety and infection-control concerns appear in several complaints, including reports of smoking while handling residents and general lack of hygiene, raising red flags about risk for vulnerable patients.

    Food and dining receive mixed but mostly negative comments: several reviewers report poor food quality, incorrect meal deliveries, and few fresh fruits or greens. Conversely, a handful say the dining room is acceptable and activities occur in the cafeteria. Reports of long waits during meals, stacked dishes, and inconsistent meal service point to operational and staffing challenges impacting nutrition and dining experience.

    Security and personal-property management are prominent concerns. Multiple reviews document missing items — clothing, a cellphone, a wheelchair cushion — and at least one review describes a theft investigation. These incidents have led reviewers to call for clearer, stronger policies on patient theft and improved accountability. One reviewer with a former state health official background explicitly expressed skepticism that reported issues will be fully addressed and even suggested the facility should be closed, indicating that at least some concerns are viewed as systemic rather than isolated.

    Despite the many negatives, there are notable strengths: the therapy department is repeatedly praised and described as effective in aiding recovery, certain staff members earn strong positive recognition for their care and responsiveness, and some residents/families report efficient, friendly service and a clean, comfortable environment. The facility is also described as an economical option, with easy access and adequate space.

    Patterns that emerge: 1) wide variability in care depending on shift and specific staff, 2) recurring medication and monitoring lapses, 3) cleanliness and odor problems reported by multiple reviewers, and 4) troubling incidents around resident property and security. Taken together, the reviews suggest a facility with capable personnel and some good services (notably therapy), but with inconsistent staffing, operational and policy weaknesses that lead to safety, dignity, and quality-of-care concerns for many residents. Families considering this facility should weigh the positive aspects (certain exemplary staff, therapy, room size, cost) against the documented risks (medication errors, theft, nighttime neglect, cleanliness) and seek direct reassurances about staffing patterns, medication protocols, security measures, and infection-control practices before placement.

    Location

    Map showing location of Eagle Creek Healthcare Center

    About Eagle Creek Healthcare Center

    Eagle Creek Healthcare Center was a senior care facility in Indianapolis that specialized in bridging the gap between hospital and home for individuals needing short-term rehabilitation, as well as providing long-term care in a compassionate, secure environment. Focusing on fostering independence and dignity, the center aimed to offer specialized support designed to meet the needs of residents with varied healthcare requirements. The care delivered at Eagle Creek Healthcare Center extended beyond basic medical management and sought to create an environment for healing and recovery, with a variety of programs tailored for personal rehabilitation and restorative care.

    At the heart of the facility, daily operations surrounded the delivery of individualized health plans developed to promote safe and efficient recoveries for patients leaving acute medical settings. The center’s infrastructure included a combination of double occupancy rooms featuring subdued interior decor, as well as dedicated spaces for communal activities like dining and therapy. Residents could participate in scheduled activities often held in the cafeteria, with additional attention given to safety through regular emergency drills.

    In striving to offer a comprehensive care experience, Eagle Creek Healthcare Center maintained a focus on long-term support as well, ensuring residents who required ongoing nursing services were accommodated in a setting intended to alleviate anxiety and provide comfort. The care team’s objective was not only to manage physical health needs but also to encourage social engagement, enhance quality of life, and maintain a sense of community within the center’s walls.

    Eagle Creek Healthcare Center is now closed as of July 2022, but its legacy reflects a commitment to helping individuals navigate a challenging phase between hospitalization and a return to independent living or assisted support. Its approach combined professional healthcare with the goal of dignity and independence for every resident, embodying the drive to serve the unique needs of seniors requiring both short-term and extended care.

    People often ask...

    Nearby Communities

    • Aerial view of a senior living facility named Montage Mason surrounded by green lawns, trees, parking lots, and nearby buildings under a clear sky.
      $4,395 – $5,274+4.5 (75)
      Semi-private
      assisted living, memory care

      Montage Mason

      5373 Merten Dr, Mason, OH, 45040
    • Exterior view of a senior living facility named The Ashton on Dorsey, featuring a large covered entrance with stone pillars, multiple windows, and three flagpoles with flags in front of the building under a clear blue sky.
      $4,100 – $6,900+4.7 (76)
      Studio • 1 Bedroom • 2 Bedroom
      independent, assisted living, memory care

      The Ashton on Dorsey

      1105 Dorsey Ln, Louisville, KY, 40223
    • Evening view of the entrance area of Belmont Village Senior Living Lincoln Park, featuring brick walls, decorative lighting fixtures, a circular chandelier on the ceiling, and a sign with the facility's name visible near the street.
      $5,506 – $7,157+4.5 (131)
      Semi-private • 1 Bedroom • Studio
      independent, assisted living, memory care

      Belmont Village Senior Living Lincoln Park

      700 W Fullerton Ave, Chicago, IL, 60614
    • Exterior view of Belmont Village Senior Living Glenview building at dusk, showing a large covered entrance with white columns, well-maintained landscaping with bushes and trees, and a multi-story brick and siding facade with lit windows.
      $3,965+4.6 (121)
      Semi-private
      independent, assisted living, memory care

      Belmont Village Senior Living Glenview

      2200 Golf Rd, Glenview, IL, 60025
    • Exterior view of a large, modern three-story senior living facility building with a covered entrance driveway, surrounded by green lawns and trees under a partly cloudy blue sky.
      $5,633 – $7,322+3.9 (69)
      Semi-private • 1 Bedroom • Studio
      assisted living, memory care

      Alto Grayslake

      1865 E Belvidere Rd, Grayslake, IL, 60030
    • Two-story senior living building with balconies overlooking a large manicured lawn and pond under a blue sky.
      $2,189 – $3,529+4.4 (70)
      Studio • 1 Bedroom • 2 Bedroom
      independent living

      StoryPoint Grand Rapids West

      3121 Lake Michigan Drive Northwest, Grand Rapids, MI, 49504

    Assisted Living in Nearby Cities

    1. 64 facilities$5,600/mo
    2. 58 facilities$5,706/mo
    3. 84 facilities$5,965/mo
    4. 88 facilities$6,286/mo
    5. 43 facilities$5,680/mo
    6. 92 facilities$5,972/mo
    7. 91 facilities$6,018/mo
    8. 92 facilities$6,018/mo
    9. 66 facilities$5,582/mo
    10. 76 facilities$5,715/mo
    11. 118 facilities$5,433/mo
    12. 140 facilities$5,531/mo
    © 2025 Mirador Living