Majestic Care of Connersville: Sexual Abuse Failures - IN
Federal inspectors cited the facility following a complaint inspection completed October 29, 2025, finding that Majestic Care failed to protect residents from sexual abuse and failed to properly investigate after the incidents were reported.
The woman who waited was identified in inspection records as Resident G. She has type 2 diabetes, generalized anxiety disorder, and depression. A quarterly assessment from September 2025 found her moderately cognitively impaired. She gets around in a wheelchair.
When inspectors interviewed her on October 27, she described what had happened a couple of weeks before. She had been wheeling herself down a hallway when another resident, identified as Resident C, came up behind her and took over pushing the chair. As he pushed, she said, he slid his hand down the front of her chest. She swiped his hand away and told him to cut it out.
She told staff. More than one of them.
The director of nursing, she said, had never come in to speak with her about it.
That detail sits at the center of what inspectors found: not just that the groping happened, but that the facility's own response collapsed at every level. Resident G told staff. The facility had a written policy defining sexual abuse as any non-consensual sexual contact of any type with a resident. That same policy required the facility to identify and intervene in situations where abuse is more likely to occur, and to ensure other residents were protected. None of that, according to inspectors, translated into action after Resident G reported what Resident C had done to her.
What makes the finding harder to dismiss is that Resident G was not describing an isolated incident. She told inspectors the sexual behaviors kept happening outside, when residents were coming back in from the smoking area with Resident C. She said no one ever sees it.
She was right that someone else had seen something, or rather, had experienced it herself. A second resident, identified in inspection records only through a brief reference at the top of the narrative, was groped on her breast by Resident C on the way inside from the 8:00 p.m. smoke break. That incident was witnessed by at least one other resident. The director of nursing was notified. The harm level recorded for that incident was actual harm.
Two women. The same man. The same location, the smoking area and the path back inside. A pattern that Resident G described explicitly to inspectors, one she said she had already described to staff.
The facility's medication records add a layer of context that inspectors included without elaboration. Resident B, a third resident referenced in the report, received buspirone, an anti-anxiety medication, at bedtime on October 15. The inspectors noted this in the clinical record review. The inclusion suggests inspectors were examining whether residents caught up in or witnessing these events were receiving appropriate follow-up care, though the report does not draw that connection explicitly.
What the report does make explicit is the gap between the facility's written commitments and what actually happened. The abuse policy the director of nursing handed to inspectors on the morning of October 27 stated clearly that the facility would ensure other residents are protected. Resident G had told staff what happened to her. She had waited. The director of nursing had not come to her room.
Majestic Care of Connersville is located at 1029 East 5th Street. The inspection was a complaint survey, meaning someone, a resident, a family member, a staff member, had contacted authorities before inspectors arrived. The complaint was logged under intake number 2644466.
The citation issued covers what federal regulators categorize as a failure to protect residents from abuse, including sexual abuse, and a failure to investigate and respond adequately once abuse was reported. The level of harm attached to at least one incident was recorded as actual harm, the federal designation used when an inspector determines that a resident suffered real injury or distress, not merely that harm was possible.
Resident G, moderately cognitively impaired and dependent on a wheelchair, described a situation in which she did everything a resident in her position could reasonably do. She resisted. She reported. She waited for someone in authority to follow through. She told inspectors the behavior kept happening outside, in the same place, in the same circumstances, and that staff never witnessed it.
The inspection record does not say whether Resident C was assessed, monitored, separated from other residents, or had his access to the smoking area restricted after either incident was reported. It does not say whether any staff member who received Resident G's report documented it, escalated it, or acted on it before inspectors arrived. It does not say whether the second woman, the one groped at the 8:00 p.m. smoke break, received any follow-up beyond the director of nursing being notified.
What it says is that when inspectors sat down with Resident G on the afternoon of October 27, she was still waiting.
The facility was given the opportunity to submit a plan of correction. For information on that plan, CMS directs the public to contact the nursing home or the state survey agency directly.
Resident G told inspectors she had swiped his hand away and told him to cut it out. She had done that much on her own, in a hallway, from a wheelchair, without warning. What she could not do was make the director of nursing walk down the hall to her room.
Full Inspection Report
The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Majestic Care of Connersville from 2025-10-29 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.
Download the official CMS inspection PDF from Medicare.gov
Additional Resources
Data source: This article is based on inspection data downloaded directly from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) via Medicare.gov. CMS releases inspection reports in bulk; we publish the findings as documented by state surveyors in the official Form CMS-2567 Statement of Deficiencies.
Plan of correction: The CMS report we receive does not include the facility's plan of correction. Facilities submit plans of correction separately to state survey agencies and those responses may not be reflected in CMS data at the time of publication. The absence of a plan of correction in our data does not mean one was not filed. Readers who want information about corrective steps taken are encouraged to contact the facility directly or their state survey agency.
Corrections may have occurred: Inspection reports reflect conditions observed on the date of the survey. Facilities may have implemented corrections, staffing changes, additional training, or other remediation since the report was issued. We report what CMS provides and encourage readers to seek current information from the facility.
Editorial process: Inspection findings are extracted from CMS source documents and synthesized using AI, reviewed for factual accuracy against the original report by our editorial team.
Professional review: All content reviewed by Christopher F. Nesbitt, Sr., NH EMT & BU-trained Paralegal.
Last verified: September 19, 2026 · Our methodology
MAJESTIC CARE OF CONNERSVILLE in CONNERSVILLE, IN was cited for abuse-related violations during a health inspection on October 29, 2025.
The woman who waited was identified in inspection records as Resident G.
Health inspections identify deficiencies that facilities must correct. Violations range from minor documentation issues to serious safety concerns. Review the full report below for specific details and facility response.