Highland Oaks
2750 West Highland Avenue, Elgin, IL 60123 · Non profit - Church related · 24 certified beds · (847) 741-4543 Medicaid only — no Medicare
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (28% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Aug 2024
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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 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 held steady at 5 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 | 6.1% | 13.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.0% | 6.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.4% | 54.2% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger 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 | 5.0% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 3.2% | 14.3% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 29.9% | 18.3% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 91.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.4% | 4.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.7% | 20.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 20.8% | 21.7% | 17.1% | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ 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.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 24 beds and averages 21.7 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 5.25 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.08 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.65 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 4.68 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.48 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.22 to 0.74 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 28% is below 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 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.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-11 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive water management program plan to detect and control legionella and water borne pathogens in the facility's water system. This failure had the potential to affect all 20 residents in the certified section. The findings include: The resident roster provided by the facility on December 8, 2025, during the survey entrance conference shows 20 residents in the certified section. 1.On December 9, 2025, at 3:10 PM, V2 (Director of Nursing) and V10 (Maintenance Director presented the facility's Water Management Program, a 3 page document. While reviewing the facility's water system diagram together, V10 pointed to the drinking fountain on the drawing and stated the facility does not even have a drinking fountain, yet it was included in the water management plan as a part of the water system description. Review of the water system description did not include if there were any areas of deadlines, areas of corrosion in the pipes, or any areas of stagnant water. On December 11, 2025,…
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 · D2025-12-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to properly evaluate and treat a resident who sustained a burn injury from coffee spill.This applies to 1 of 1 resident (R20) reviewed for quality of care in the sample of 12.The findings include:R20's Nursing Progress Note documented by V13 (Nurse) on December 6, 2025, at 10:30 PM, showed a notification time to the physician of 8:30 PM. The note showed that R20 sustained a burn on his thigh while drinking coffee at dinner due to R20's tremors. Additionally, the note also showed that V21 (Physician/Medical Director) gave an order to apply moisturizer, watch for open area, cover with gauze dressing if tender, and to notify the provider if it worsens.R20's Nursing Progress Note showed an edited note documented by V13 on December 6, 2025, at 10:33 PM that when assessing R20's left thigh at bedtime, R20's left thigh was noted with redness, warm to touch, and with areas of blister fluid-filled sacs. The same Progress Note also showed that R20's POA and Physician were notified.On December 10, 2025, at 2:45 PM, V13…
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 · D2025-12-11 · 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 notify the physician and failed to implement pressure ulcer interventions to prevent the development of facility acquired pressure ulcers for a resident at high risk for developing a pressure ulcer.This applies to 1 of 3 resident (R20) reviewed for pressure ulcers in the sample of 12.The findings include:R20's face sheet showed that R20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R20 had multiple diagnoses, including Parkinson's Disease with dyskinesia and dementia. R20's Quarterly (MDS) Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], showed R20 had severe cognitive impairment. The same MDS also showed that R20 was dependent on the facility staff for toileting, showering, required moderate assistance for personal hygiene, and touch assistance for bed mobility. R20's Pressure Ulcer Care Plan dated April 30, 2025, showed that R20 was at high risk for skin failure related to advanced age, limited mobility due to Parkinson's disease, incontinent episodes, history…
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 · D2025-12-11 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide mechanical soft consistency diet per menu spreadsheet and facility policy guidance. This applies to 1 of 1 resident (R10) reviewed for dining in the sample of 13. The findings include:R10's face sheet included diagnoses of cerebral infarction due to embolism of right middle cerebral artery, dysphagia following cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety, dysarthria following cerebral infarctionR10's diet order on POS (Physician Order Summary) included Mechanical Soft diet and Nectar Thick Liquid. R10's nutrition care plan (dated May 15, 2025) included that R10 is at risk for aspiration due to difficulty swallowing post stroke. Interventions for the same included (to serve) diet per Medical Doctor's order.1.Facility Fall/Winter menu for Monday, spreadsheet for December 08, 2025, included Sweet and Sour Pork…
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 before2025-12-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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 observations, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain food safe temperatures at the steam table. This applies to 3 of 3 residents (R15, R19, R24) reviewed for pureed diets in the sample of 14. The findings include: Facility Fall/Winter menu for Monday, December 08, 2025, included Sweet and Sour Pork Saute, Sugar Snap Peas.On December 08, 2025, at 12:15 PM, the food temperatures were taken for the lunch meal. V5 (Director of Dietary) stated that meal service had started at 12:00 PM.The pureed sweet and sour pork showed 111.5 degrees Fahrenheit, and the pureed snap peas showed 122.5 degrees Fahrenheit. On December 08, 2025, at 12:23 PM, V6 (Cook) stated that he prepared the pureed items at around 10:00AM. On enquiry on how he prepared these items, V6 stated that he pureed the cooked sweet and sour pork and sugar snap peas respectively in a blender and had added a little hot water and thickener during the pureeing process. V6 stated that he then placed the items directly on the steam table. V6 stated that the hot water (in the steam table) may not have 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-29 · 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 properly label and store food in the refrigerator; ensure thermometers were inside the refrigerator; and ensure leftovers were properly cooled. This affects all residents residing in the facility. The findings include: The CMS 671 dated 8/29/24 showed there were 22 residents. On 8/27/24 at 8:59 AM, during a kitchen tour with V6 (Dietary Manager) there was a small refrigerator, under the steamer. The digital thermometer on the exterior of the refrigerator showed 37 degrees. There was no thermometer inside the refrigerator. V6 said the dietary staff use the digital reading from the exterior for the temperature logs. He said temperatures were monitored to ensure the quality of the food and prevent foodborne illness. There was a stand-up refrigerator with beverages inside. The external digital reading was 39 degrees. There was not a thermometer inside the refrigerator. At 9:03 AM, there was a Cooling Temperature Log affixed to the outside of the walk-in cooler. (The last documented items was Meatloaf on 5/20/24.…
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 before2024-08-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 staff wore appropriate PPE (personal protective equipment) in enhanced barrier precaution rooms when providing direct care for residents and failed to prevent cross-contamination during personal cares for 3 of 5 residents (R19, R16, and R14) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 14. The findings include: 1. R19's face sheet, provided by the facility on 8/29/24, showed she had diagnoses including muscular dystrophy, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), protein-calorie malnutrition, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, and gastrostomy status (a g-tube). R19's ADL care plan initiated on 6/28/24 showed she is limited in her ability to transfer herself due to deconditioning/weakness related to muscular dystrophy and anemia. R19's Nutritional Status care plan initiated on 6/28/24 showed she has a g-tube and is on Enhanced Barrier Precautions: Follow instructions outside of resident's door. On 8/27/24 at 9:57 AM, V9 went into R19's room with surveyor. V5 (CNA) had her arms around R19's waist, putting 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 · D2024-08-14 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to prevent the diversion of a resident's controlled substance medication. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for misappropriation of resident property in the sample of 3. The finding include. R1's Controlled Drug Receipt / Record / Disposition (commonly referred to as a count sheet or controlled substance count sheet) showed the facility received, on R1's behalf, 120 tablets of 50 milligram (mg) tramadol, a schedule IV narcotic pain medication. The count sheets showed the tablets were delivered on 5/13/24 and were dispensed in four separate punch cards, each card containing 30 tablets of tramadol. R1's count sheet showed each individual punch card was delivered with its own accompanying count sheet (4 punch cards, 4 count sheets). The first dose of the first punch card of tramadol, from the delivery on 5/13/24, was dispensed on 5/16/24 at 11:59 AM. The final dose of the first card was given on 5/26/24 at 12:25 PM. The second punch card was started on 5/26/24 at 9:00 PM and the final dose of this card was given…
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 · D2024-08-14 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide 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 implement policies to identify and prevent the diversion of controlled substances. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for controlled substances in the sample of 3. The findings include: R1's Controlled Drug Receipt / Record / Disposition (commonly referred to as a count sheet or controlled substance count sheet) showed the facility received, on R1's behalf, 120 tablets of 50 milligram (mg) tramadol, a schedule IV narcotic pain medication. The count sheets showed the tablets were delivered on 5/13/24 and were dispensed in four separate punch cards, each card containing 30 tablets of tramadol. R1's count sheet showed each individual punch card was delivered with its own accompanying count sheet (4 punch cards, 4 count sheets). The first dose of the first punch card of tramadol, from the delivery on 5/13/24, was dispensed on 5/16/24 at 11:59 AM. The final dose of the first card was given on 5/26/24 at 12:25 PM. The second punch card was started on 5/26/24 at 9:00 PM and the final dose of this card was given 6/5/24…
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 · D2023-07-27 · 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 follow physician orders to apply a hand splint to a resident at risk for contractures. This applies to 1 of 2 residents (R15) reviewed for mobility and range of motion in the sample of 10. The findings include: The EMR (Electronic Medical Record) showed R15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including stroke with hemiplegia (paralysis) and hemiparesis of the left side, dementia, and hypertension. R15's MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated July 19, 2023, showed R15 had moderate cognitive impairment, and R15 required extensive assistance from facility staff for bed mobility, dressing, and personal hygiene. The MDS continued to show R15 had a functional limitation in range of motion impairment of the upper extremity on one side. R15's ADL (Activity of Daily Living) care plan dated April 25, 2023, showed, I need assistance with my ADLs due to cognitive loss related to dementia, weakness/pain/limited…
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 · D2023-07-27 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policy to offer the COVID-19 vaccine to residents. This applies to 2 of 5 residents (R10 and R15) reviewed for immunizations in the sample of 10. The findings include: 1. The EMR (Electronic Medical Record) showed R10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including poliomyelitis, Parkinson's disease, and hypertension. The MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated July 12, 2023, showed R10 had moderate cognitive impairment. R10's COVID-19 care plan dated April 18, 2023, showed I am at risk for infection related to COVID-19 pandemic. The care plan continued to show multiple interventions dated April 18, 2023, including, COVID-19 vaccination per facility protocol. R10's Preventative Health Care Report showed R10 received COVID-19 vaccines on March 4, 2021, March 24, 2021, and December 21, 2021. The report did not show R10 had received an updated COVID-19 vaccine and R10 was not up to date with COVID-19 vaccinations. The facility…
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in IL
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. 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 14A383. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-11, 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.