Graham Hospital
210 West Walnut Street, Canton, IL 61520 · Non profit - Other · 35 certified beds · (309) 647-5240 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- nursing-staff turnover (82%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 12.5% | 13.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.1% | 6.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.1% | 0.9% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.3% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 54.2% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 11.5% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.2% | 14.3% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 3.5% | 18.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 7.7% | 4.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.4% | 20.6% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.1% | 21.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.8% | 63.1% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 28.5% | 26.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 18.9% | 13.9% | 12.0% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
66.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 157 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 54.8% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 62 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 66.7%CMS range 60.6–71.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.1%CMS range 6.2–14.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 54.8% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 50.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 62.9% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.2% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.2%CMS range 2.3–10.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.57 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 35 beds and averages 21.2 residents a day — about 61% occupied, or roughly 14 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.45 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 2.13 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.26 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 5.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.58 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 2.28 to 1.76 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 82% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · G2026-04-01 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement physician ordered pressure relieving interventions to prevent the development of pressure ulcers and failed to initiate a pressure ulcer care plan as soon as a pressure ulcers were identified for one of one resident (R1) reviewed for pressure ulcers in the sample of 21. These failures resulted in R1 developing a stage two facility acquired pressure ulcer to the right gluteus and a stage four pressure ulcer to the right base of the big toe that required mechanical debridement. The facility's Skin Assessment, Wound Prevention, and Care Policy dated 4/2025 documents, (The facility) shall provide care, treatment, and services to: 1. Identify those at risk for skin breakdown. 2. Promote comfort and mobility. 3. Reduce or relieve pressure and maintain skin integrity. 4. Provide appropriate interventions to manage pressure ulcers and minimize infection. 5. Provide learning opportunities. Prevention of skin breakdown is primarily a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-01 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — widespreadDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents' comprehensive care plans were individualized to reflect each resident's specific needs, conditions, and preferences. This failure affects all 21 residents who reside at the facility. Findings include: The facility's Care Plan Policy revised 3/10/25 documents the individualized care plan is used to outline the care in which the patients shall receive during their stay. A plan of care which defines patient or family outcomes within a pre-established time frame, prompting continuity of care using interventions to meet expected outcomes. The documented plan of care is based on the patient's goals and time frames, settings, and services required to meet those goals. Goals need to be realistic, individualized, patient centered, measurable, dated, the care plan needs to be reviewed daily to determine if goals are being met. The facility's Patient/Resident Care Plan and Care Conference revised September 2025 documents Patients/residents shall have an individualized care plan. The resident care plan helps to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-04-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure sanitary conditions were maintained during food preparation and service to prevent cross-contamination and foodborne illness, in accordance with professional standards for food safety. This failure has the potential to affect all 21 residents who reside at the facility.Findings include:The facility's CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) Form 671 dated 3/30/26 and signed by V1 (Administrator) documents 21 residents reside within the facility.On 03/30/2026 at 11:05 AM, V8 (Cook) was observed cleaning main food preparation areas with a wash rag while food on the steam table remained uncovered. The same wash rag was placed on the counter and subsequently used to clean a food thermometer between temperature checks of the food on the steam table. During continued observation, V8 was observed wiping sauce from the lasagna with her fingers onto the same wash rag used to clean the counters and thermometer. When checking hamburger temperatures, the initial holding temperature was 142 F, V8 stated the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-04-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Facility failures resulted in two deficient practices.A. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an effective infection prevention and control program by failing to perform surveillance to track and monitor residents and staff illnesses and differentiating between resident facility-acquired and community acquired infections. This failure has the potential to affect all 21 residents residing in the facility.B. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions while providing incontinent cares for one of 12 residents reviewed for infection control practices in the sample of 21.Findings include:A. The facility's Infection and Prevention Control Program Plan, dated March 2024, documents Policy: Based on current scientific knowledge, accepted practice guidelines, and applicable law and regulations, the hospital shall provide written policies and procedures related to Infection Control, surveillance and prevention for all departments of the organization. To assist in the prevention…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-01 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the designated Infection Preventionist completed specialized Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) training prior to performing the role. This failure has the potential to affect all 21 residents residing in the facility. Findings include:The facility's CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) Form 671 dated 3/30/26 and signed by V1 (Administrator) documents 21 residents reside within the facility.The facility's Infection and Prevention Control Program Plan, dated March 2024, documents Policy: Based on current scientific knowledge, accepted practice guidelines, and applicable law and regulations, The hospital shall provide written policies and procedures related to Infection Control, surveillance and prevention for all departments of the organization. To assist in the prevention of the transmission of infections the entire staff is responsible for adhering to policies and procedures related to infection control. 7. Infection Control Professional: a. A Registered Nurse with knowledge of epidemiology…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-01 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's indwelling urinary catheter bag was covered to maintain the resident's dignity for one of one resident (R19) reviewed for dignity in a sample of 21.Findings include:The Illinois Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program Resident Rights Booklet, dated 11/18, documents Your rights to dignity and respect: Your facility must treat you with dignity and respect and must care for you in a manner that promotes your quality of life.R19's MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated 3/26/26, documents R19 is severely cognitively impaired and has an indwelling catheter. R19's Physician Orders, dated 3/13/26, indicates R19 has an indwelling urinary catheter. On 3/30/26 at 10:27 AM R19 was sitting in her recliner in her room with the door open. R19's urinary catheter drainage bag was observed hanging on the side of R19's bed (facing the door) and was not covered by a dignity bag. The drainage bag was one fourth full of yellow urine. On 3/31/26 at 11:42 AM V1 (Administrator) stated R19's urinary catheter bag should…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-01 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to accurately code the MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessments for two of two residents (R5 and R8) reviewed for MDS Accuracy in the sample of 21. Findings Include: CMS's (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Version 3.0 Manual Section P: Restraints and Alarms dated 10/2025 documents, 'Intent: The intent of this section is to record the frequency that the resident was restrained by any of the listed devices or an alarm was used, at any time day or night, during the seven-day look-back period. Assessors will evaluate whether or not a device meets the definition of a physical restraint or an alarm and code only the devices that meet the definitions in the appropriate categories. 1.R8's current Physician's Order dated 3/16/26 documents R8 utilizes bilateral upper side rails for positioning and bed mobility. R8's MDS assessment dated [DATE] documents R8 is cognitively intact and uses bedrails as a restraint…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-01 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a restorative range of motion program for one of one resident (R6) reviewed for limitations in range of motion in the sample of 21.Findings include:The facility's Restorative Range of Motion Policy dated 2/2026 documents, The restorative Range of Motion program shall provide the patient with the assistance required to maintain and improve joint mobility and promote a greater sense of well-being, thus assisting in the prevention of contractures, pain, and edema. Objectives: 1.To maintain and improve range of motion to an extremity that has decreased ability and movement. 2. To prevent a decrease in patient mobility due to loss of ROM (Range of Motion). 3. To increase joint flexibility, thus leading to greater ease of ADLS (Activities of Daily Living) and transfers. A physician's order shall not be required for initial assessment of the Restorative Nurse Assistant program but shall be required for establishing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-01 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess and identify entrapment risk associated with the use of side rails and document alternatives to side rails with outcomes prior to installing side rails for one of two residents (R5) reviewed for side rail use in a sample of 21.Findings include:The facility's Side Rails and Entrapment Policy, dated February 2026, documents, Policy: It is the policy of this facility to identify and reduce safety risks and hazards commonly associated with bed rail use. A duo-faceted approach shall be used to achieve sustainable quality outcomes, including 1) regular bed maintenance and 2) individual bed rail evaluations. In response to the requirement of providing for a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, the facility's regular preventative maintenance program shall include regular inspection of all bed systems (rails, frames and mattresses, and operation components) to ensure they are clean, comfortable, and safe. The facility shall also ensure individual resident bed rail evaluations are performed on a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-12-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to use temperature testing strips to ensure dishes reach the required surface temperature during the rinse cycle in the dish machine, failed to ensure hanging light covers over the kitchen's fryer baskets were clean and free of debris and grime, and failed to complete and record cool down temperatures for prepared meats and leftover items that were prepared ahead and stored in the facility's refrigerator and freezer for future use. These failures have the potential to affect all 22 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: 1.) The facility's Washing and Storage of Dishes and Utensils policy, dated 4/2024, documents The dish machine water temperatures are as follows: Wash cycle: 150 to 165 degrees. Rinse cycle: 160 to 180 degrees. Final Rinse cycle: 180 to 195 degrees. If the proper temperatures are not met, the management team is notified. On 12/16/24 at 10:20 AM V5 (Dietary Manager) ran a temperature test cycle on the facility's dish machine. V5 stated the facility's dishwasher is a high temperature…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-18 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement restorative programming for five of six residents (R5, R9, R11, R13, and R15) reviewed for limitations in range of motion in the sample of 21. Findings include: The facility's Restorative Activity Aide Job Description (undated) documents, The restorative aide will perform specialized restorative nursing and activities of daily living activities for residents, assess and documents the resident's response and assist the nursing staff as directed. Primary Duties and Responsibilities: 1. Is responsible to perform specific restorative nursing procedures. (Example: Exercises, ambulation, and assistance with ADLs (Activities of Daily Living), to residents as directed by the MDS (Minimum Data Set) Coordinator. 2. Is responsible to keep daily performance records on residents receiving restorative nursing procedures. Reporting to MDS Coordinator daily refused treatments, omitted treatments, or other adverse observations. 3. Is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-18 · tag F0646 — isolatedNotify the appropriate authorities when residents with MD or ID services has a significant change in condition.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to refer a resident to the PASRR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) State Agency to obtain a Level II PASRR after experiencing a significant change in behavioral and psychiatric symptoms for one of one resident (R2) reviewed for Mental Illness in the sample of 21. Findings include: The facility's (PASSR) policy dated 9-5-24 documents, It is the responsibility of the Psychosocial Designee and/or designated staff to coordinate and ensure compliance with all PASRR federal, state, and local mandates including working with Illinois Maximus PASRR designated agency. The Psychosocial Designee or designated staff shall refer to the designated state agency any resident whose behavioral health condition had declined or worsened and is significantly changes from the most recent PASRR Level II evaluation. Residents with documented mental health condition and/or suspected of mental health conditions shall be referred to the state agency for determination of a mental health condition. This includes but is not limited to residents…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-11-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to perform COVID-19 testing on staff with direct high-risk exposure to a COVID-19 positive resident. The facility also failed to implement their COVID-19 Response Plan to monitor residents at least daily for a fever to prevent the potential spread of COVID-19 virus. These failures had the potential to affect the 15 residents residing on the facility ICF (Intermediate Care Facility East wing). Findings include: The CDC's (Centers for Disease Control) Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Healthcare Personnel During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic, dated 5/8/23, documents, Nursing homes: Responding to a newly identified SARS-CoV-2-infected HCP or resident: When performing an outbreak response to a known case, facilities should always defer to the recommendations of the jurisdiction's public health authority. A single new case of SARS-CoV-2 infection in any HCP (Healthcare Professional) or resident should…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2026-04-28 for 29 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCCONKEY, TERESA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2013 |
| SENNEFF, ROBERT | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2008 |
| REEDER, JULIE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 03/06/2017 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in IL
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Illinois Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 145572. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-01, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.