Fair Oaks Health Care Center

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

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.

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.

68.6% 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 566 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 27.3% 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 297 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 0.97 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 96% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 51 beds and averages 39.7 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 11 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 5.35 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.44 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.49 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 4.47 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.71 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.61 to 1.01 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 51% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

29 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 17 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2026-02-02 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  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 ensure a resident was transferred with a mechanical lift in a safe manner which applies to 1 of 5 residents (R1) reviewed for safe transfers in a sample of 5. This failure resulted in R1 falling from a mechanical lift sling sustaining a subdural hematoma. This past compliance occurred from 1/23/26 to 1/29/25.The findings include:R1's undated Facesheet showed R1 is a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. This Factsheet showed R1 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with a new diagnosis of traumatic subdural hematoma.The facility's State Agency Serious Injury Report dated 1/23/26 showed R1 was hospitalized after falling from a mechanical lift sling. This report showed the cause was from an improper sling attachment for the sling loops.R1's Hospital Discharge Report dated 1/27/26 showed R1 was admitted to the hospital with an admission diagnoses which included a subdural hematoma (brain bleed) and a hematoma of 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-10-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  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 a safe wheelchair transport for a high fall risk resident for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for safety in the sample of 4. This failure resulted in R1 falling forward from the wheelchair and sustaining a broken nose and a laceration to his forehead that required sutures.Findings Include:On 10/9/25 at 10:10 AM, V9 (Certified Nursing Assistant -CNA/Restorative Aide) pushed R1 in his wheelchair from the dining room to a seating room without footrests in place. R1's shoes came in contact with the floor four times during the transport of approximately 25 feet. R1 was well groomed with a bandage on the middle of his forehead. R1 had a privacy bag for his indwelling catheter directly under the seat of his chair. The surveyor asked R1 how he hurt his head. R1 replied, He (V6 - CNA) was giving me a ride from the dining room to my room and suddenly this (touching his wheelchair) stopped, and I kept going. I hit my head on the floor. 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-10 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review the facility failed to notify the physician of resident's rash on the day it was identified. This applies to 1 of 4 (R1) in the sample of 4 reviewed for notification. The findings include: On 3/10/2025 at 9:44AM, V6 Physical Therapy Assistant (PTA) stated she worked with [R1] on 2/21/2025 and [R1] mentioned she had a rash on her neck. V6 stated she did see a blotchy red area on her neck and believes she reported to the nurse but was unsure who she reported it to. On 3/10/2025 at 10:39AM, V8 Registered Nurse (RN) stated she vaguely remembers [R1]. V8 stated nobody mentioned a rash to her that day. V8 stated she would have called the doctor if the resident did in fact have a rash. On 3/10/2025 at 12:17AM, V11 Nurse Practitioner (NP) stated she was not notified of [R1's] rash until 2/25/2025 right before [R1] was being discharged . On 3/10/2025 at 1:30PM, V1 Administrator stated the facility did not have documentation of a provider notification for [R1] on 2/21/2025. The facility failed to provide documentation a physician or provider was notified…

  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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-10 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review the facility failed to assess a resident after a rash was observed by staff. This applies to 1 of 4 (R1) in the sample of 4 reviewed for assessments. The findings include: On 3/10/2025 at 9:44AM, V6 Physical Therapy Assistant (PTA) stated she worked with [R1] on 2/21/2025 and [R1] mentioned she had a rash on her neck. V6 stated she did see a blotchy red area on her neck and believes she reported to the nurse but was unsure who she reported it to. On 3/10/2025 at 10:39AM, V8 Registered Nurse (RN) stated she vaguely remembers [R1]. V8 stated nobody mentioned a rash to her that day. V8 stated she would assess the resident if someone told her about a rash and call the doctor if the resident did in fact have a rash. On 3/10/2025 at 10:19AM, V7 Infection Control Preventionist stated if a resident has a rash it is reported to her by the nurse, and she would follow up. V7 stated the physician should be involved so they can assess it as well and see what treatments is needed for it. V7 said assessment and notification should happen on the same day. On…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-06 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
  Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
  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 provide the correct portion of vegetables. This applies to 5 of 5 residents (R17, R21, R4, R6, & R11) reviewed for menus in the sample of 12 and 3 residents (R16, R1, & R80) outside the sample. The findings include: On 6/4/24 at 11:50 AM, V4 [NAME] began the noon lunch service for the dining room nearest the kitchen. V4 served sloppy joes, peas with onions, sweet potato, and cake. V4 used a green handled ice cream scoop to serve the peas and the portion appeared inadequate. On 6/4/24 at 12:18 PM, V4 completed the lunch service for the dining room adjacent to the kitchen. V4 stated the green handled ice cream scoop was 2.66 ounces. V4 stated the grey scoop is 4 ounces. V4 stated he always used the green scoop for vegetables. The facility's menu and recipe for peas showed the portion size should be 4 ounces. On 6/05/24 at 9:54 AM, V3 Dietary Manager stated the residents in the dining room adjacent to the kitchen only received 2 and 2/3 ounce of peas and they should have been served 4 ounces. (More than a 30…

  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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure 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 measure food temperature on the steam table in a manner to prevent cross-contamination. This applies to 5 of 5 residents (R17, R21, R4, R6, & R11) reviewed for menus in the sample of 12 and 3 residents (R16, R1, & R80) outside the sample. The findings include: On 6/4/24 at 11:50 AM, V4 began the lunch service for the dining room adjacent to the kitchen. V4 stated he had already measured the temperature of the sloppy joe meat; however, it was requested he check the temperature again. V4 removed a thermometer from a cup that contained numerous writing utensils. V4 then stuck the thermometer probe into the sloppy joe meat without sanitizing the thermometer. V4 then continued with the lunch service. On 6/05/24 at 9:54 AM, V3 Dietary Manger stated .He (V4) should have cleaned the thermometer then temped the sloppy joe. The purpose of cleaning the thermometer first is to prevent any cross contamination to make sure it's clean before it goes in the food and to make sure there is no debris from its previous use. 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-06 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review the facility failed to immediately initiate potential lifesaving interventions for 1 of 1 resident (R27) reviewed for quality of care in the sample 12. The findings include: R27's Face Sheet showed a recent admission date of 3/6/24 with diagnoses to include dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), dementia, and communication deficit. R27's Nursing Note from 4/6/24 at 3:36 PM, (note authored by V2 Director of Nursing) stated At approx. 12:30 (PM), [V6 Registered Nurse] approached this writer and asked if I could come help with [R27]. This writer asked what was going on and [V6] stated he (R27) appeared to be choking. We ran into the dining room and this writer witnessed [R27] sitting at his table with [V7 and V8 Certified Nursing Assistants] two CNAs next to him trying to get him to respond to them. Cyanosis (blue/purple color of the skin caused by lack of oxygen) could be seen on all his fingers and around his lips at first glance . The note showed, I asked if the Heimlich (abdominal thrust use to dislodge food stuck in a person's airway) had been…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-06 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide 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 ensure pressure relieving interventions were in place for a resident with pressure ulcers for 1 of 4 residents (R18) reviewed for pressure in the sample of 12. The findings include: R18's undated face sheet showed an admission date of 5/7/24 and diagnoses including but not limited to gangrene, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infection, acute myeloblastic leukemia, not having achieved remission, diabetes mellitus with foot ulcer, chronic ulcer of left foot, right leg below knee amputation, elevated white blood cell count, colostomy use, and colon cancer. R18's facility assessment dated [DATE] showed no cognitive impairment and requiring staff assistance with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and personal hygiene. The same assessment showed R18 had one or more pressure ulcers. R18's weekly wound round report dated 6/4/24 showed an unstageable pressure ulcer to the coccyx with current measurements at 2.5 x 2 centimeters. 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  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 ensure interventions were put in place for a resident with a history of falls, failed to ensure the resident's fall risk assessment was reassessed after a fall with injuries, and failed to develop a care plan showing he was a fall risk and identify interventions to prevent further falls for 1 of 1 resident (R11) reviewed for falls in the sample of 12. The findings include: R11's Face Sheet, provided by the facility on 6/6/24, showed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including vascular dementia with agitation, muscle wasting and atrophy, abnormalities of gait and mobility, cognitive communication deficit, anxiety disorder, bilateral ankle effusion (a buildup of fluid in the soft tissues around the ankle joint), major depressive disorder, osteoarthritis, and chronic heart failure. R11's care plan, with a start date of 5/16/24, showed Resident experiences wandering (moves with no rational purpose, seemingly oblivious…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-06-06 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  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 ensure a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter had physician care orders in place for 1 of 5 residents (R25) reviewed for catheters in the sample of 12. The findings include: R25's undated face sheet showed an admission date of 5/8/24 and diagnoses including but not limited to arthritis due to other bacteria of the left shoulder (at admission), methicillin susceptible staphylococcus aureus infection, sepsis, stage three kidney disease, prostate cancer, and retention of urine. R25's facility assessment dated [DATE] showed no cognitive impairment and the use of a urinary catheter. The same assessment showed the use of an antibiotic medication. R25's order history report dated 5/6/24 to 6/6/24 showed the use of intravenous cefazolin (antibiotic) from admission to 5/11/24. The same report showed an order to chart on use of the antibiotic for left should joint sepsis. On 6/4/24 at 2:31 PM, R25 was seated in a wheelchair in his room. R25…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-06-06 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review the facility failed to maintain an accurate reconciliation of controlled substances. This applies to 1 of 1 resident (R18) reviewed for controlled substances in the sample of 12. The findings include: R18's hydrocodone/acetaminophen (a combination narcotic opioid pain medication and an over-the-counter pain medication) Controlled Drug Receipt/Record/Disposition form (Controlled Substance Count Sheet) showed the order was for the medication to be given every 6 hours as needed for pain. The reconciliation form showed on 5/16/24, one tablet was dispensed, and 18 tablets remained. The next two entries on the form were lined out and error was written next to the entries. The errors were signed by only one nurse. The next entry, on 5/24/24, showed one tablet was removed and 16 tablets remained. The two stricken entries between 5/16/24 and 5/24/24 did not indicate the medication was wasted or destroyed. The form did not show an entry indicating when the 18th tablet was dispensed. On 6/06/24 at 12:21 PM, V2 stated, while reviewing R18's-controlled…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide 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 prevent cross-contamination when assisting a resident with their toileting needs, and failed to ensure staff wore the proper PPE (personal protective equipment) while providing direct care to a resident on enhanced-barrier precautions for 1 of 2 residents (R18) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 12, and 1 resident (R83) outside the sample. The findings include: 1. R83's Face Sheet, provided by the facility on 6/6/24, showed she had diagnoses including displaced fracture of upper end of the left humerus (the long bone that extends from the shoulder to the elbow), osteoarthritis, obesity, and glaucoma. R83's facility assessment dated [DATE] showed she is dependent on staff for toileting and lower body dressing and requires substantial/maximal assist with upper body dressing and getting on and off the toilet. On 6/4/24 at 1:46 PM, V15 (Certified Nursing Assistant-CNA) was assisting R83 with her toileting needs. R83 had a bowel…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

$26,325 in federal fines across 2 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• $17,215 — penalty dated 2026-02-02
• $9,110 — penalty dated 2025-10-09
• Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-08-06 for 44 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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to WISCONSIN ILLINOIS SENIOR HOUSING, INC. — 7 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 17 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.

7 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $105K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in IL