Park Place Christian Community
1150 Euclid Avenue, Elmhurst, IL 60126 · Non profit - Corporation · 37 certified beds · (630) 936-4100 Medicare only — no Medicaid
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (20% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 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 | 15.7% | 13.4% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.2% | 6.3% | 5.4% | typical |
| 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 | 3.8% | 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 | 3.7% | 3.1% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 26.2% | 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 | 6.9% | 4.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.9% | 20.6% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 0.0% | 21.7% | 17.1% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.4% | 2.2% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.3% | 63.1% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.4% | 26.1% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.2% | 13.9% | 12.0% | better |
* 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.
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 304 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 49.7% 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 163 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 0.52 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 82% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 44% 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 | 68.6%CMS range 63.7–72.8 | 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 | 11.5%CMS range 9.1–14.4 | 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 | 49.7% | 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 | 53.4% | 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 | 55.2% | 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 | 95.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 0.5% | 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 | 6.2%CMS range 3.8–9.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.73 | 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 37 beds and averages 35.1 residents a day — about 95% 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 4.67 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 2.02 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.63 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 4.10 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.89 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 2.17 to 1.64 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 20% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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.
- Actual harm · G2024-09-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to safely transfer a resident during toileting when a gait belt was not used, and required assistance was not provided. This failure resulted in R1 sustaining an acute comminuted fracture of the left femur due to a fall incident occurred during direct care. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for falls in the sample of 3. The findings include: The EMR (Electronic Medical Record) showed R1, a 92-year -old with diagnoses includes dementia, depression, osteopenia, osteoarthritis, stroke, history of breast cancer and pulmonary embolism. R1's surgical history includes right knee replacement. R1 was Covid positive on August 4,2024. R1 was originally admitted to the MMC (Memory Care Center) in the facility on October 11, 2019. R1 was transferred to the skilled section in the facility on September 3, 2024. due to declining condition, multiple falls, and weakness. The incident report log showed R1 had 2 falls for 2 weeks period. The incident report…
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 · F2025-04-25 · 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 label/date/seal/store food items, remove expired items, and sanitize the food preparation counter in the facility kitchen. This applies to all residents that receive oral nutrition and foods prepared in the facility kitchen. Findings include: The facility's Long-Term Care Facility Application for Medicare and Medicaid (Form CMS-Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-671) dated 4/23/25 documents that the total census was 36 residents. On 4/23/25 at 11:00 AM, V4 (Director of Dining Services) said all 36 residents eat from the facility kitchen. 1. On 4/23/25 at 10:58 AM, V4 (Director of Dining Services) was asked to test the sanitation bucket in the kitchen prep area. V4 picked the bucket of sanitizer solution up from the floor, placed it on the preparation counter next to cook who was prepping desserts, and V4 tested strip. V4 then removed the sanitizer solution bucket from the prep counter and placed it back on the floor and walked away. V4 then returned to the prep area and waited for surveyor to continue…
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 before2025-04-25 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to mitigate the risk of cross contamination during resident care and during handling of soiled clothing/materials. This failure applies to 4 of 4 residents (R24, R16, R84, R8) reviewed for hand hygiene, and all 36 residents in the facility for soiled linen handling. The facility's Long-Term Care Facility Application for Medicare and Medicaid (Form CMS-Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-671) dated 4/23/25 documents that the total census was 36 residents. The findings include: 1. On 04/24/25 at 09:17 AM, V3 (Wound Nurse) and V9 (Nurse) were providing wound care and incontinence care for R24. R24 had a pressure wound to his left gluteal fold. V9 pushed a garbage can toward V3 with her foot. V3 used her right hand and picked up the garbage can and placed the can next to her. V3 then with her unclean gloved hands opens R24's brief and then touches R24's pressure wound spreading the wound open to examine the wound. V3 described the wound drainage and discarded her gloves in the garbage can, cleaned her…
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 · E2025-04-25 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
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 that resident medications were secured. This applies to 6 of 6 residents (R1, R8, R9, R15, R23 and R24) reviewed for medication storage in a sample of 15. Findings include: 1. On 04/23/25 at 10:23 AM, located on the over bed table, R8 had a bottle of chlorpheniramine maleate 4mg (milligram) 100 count bottle, two 1 fl oz (fluid ounce) bottles of Sodium Carboxymethylcellulose, one bottle of Ketotifen fumarate 10ml (milliliter), one bottle of povidone 0.33 fl oz, and one 12 oz bottle of aluminum hydroxide / magnesium hydroxide / simethicone. R8 stated she uses the eye drops at night when her eyes are dry. V8 stated she takes a teaspoon of the aluminum hydroxide / magnesium hydroxide / simethicone before she eats, when she has acid reflux, or heart burn. V8 stated she has acid reflux or heart burn quite often. V8 stated the medications are just over the counter. V8 stated the medications have always been sitting out and the staff never asked her about them or said she couldn't have them or said they needed…
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 · D2025-04-25 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to treat residents with dignity while providing care. This applies to 2 of 2 residents (R24 and R16) reviewed for dignity in a sample of 15. The findings include: On 04/23/25 at 12:08 PM, V8 CNA (Certified Nurses' Assistant) was standing over R24 feeding him spoonsful of a red thickened drink. V8 then went to another table and stood over R16 feeding her mashed potatoes, a green pureed food, and gave her a drink of a red liquid. On 04/24/25 at 10:17 AM, V2 DON (Director of Nursing) said that staff should be sitting while feeding residents to have a better visual observation of the resident and for the resident's dignity. The facility's Resident Rights and Responsibilities - Exhibit D policy (no dated shown) showed, These resident rights, policies and procedures ensure that each resident has a right to a dignified experience, self-determination and communication with the access to persons and services inside and outside the facility.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-02 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 that PRN (as needed) antianxiety medication orders had clinician documented rationale for use beyond 14 days, failed to identify and monitor target symptoms/behaviors and failed to implement non- pharmacological interventions prior to PRN medication use. This applies to 1 of 5 residents (R13) reviewed for unnecessary medications in the sample of 12. The findings include: R13's EMR (Electronic Medical Record) showed R13, [AGE] years old, was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease with late onset, personal history of other diseases of the nervous system and sense organs, anemia, primary hypertension, anxiety disorder, arthritis, history of left hip replacement and history of surgical repair of the right ankle. R13's MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated April 4, 2024, showed R13's cognition was severely impaired and was dependent on staff assistance for all ADLs (Activities of Daily Living)…
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 · D2023-09-28 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were obtained from the pharmacy in a timely manner to prevent residents from missing medication doses as ordered by the physician. This applies to 3 of 3 residents (R3, R4, and R5) reviewed for improper nursing care in delay in medication administration in the sample of 5. The findings include: 1. On September 27, 2023, at 10:51 AM, R3 was lying in bed in her room. R3 said she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], around 3:00 PM. R3 said she receives a medication for her restless leg syndrome every night (Pramipexole Dihydrochloride) two different eye drop medications for her glaucoma (Latanoprost and Timolol Maleate), and medication for her depression (Bupropion). R3 said, The medications were not here in the facility the first night I got here, so I did not receive them. I was most worried about the medication I take for my restless leg syndrome because it is so bad that when I don't take the medication, my arms start to shake as…
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 before2023-06-08 · 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 follow standards of infection control practices related to hand hygiene and gloving during provision of incontinence care. This applies to 2 of the 14 residents (R16, R25) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 14. The Findings Include: 1. On 6/06/23 at 1:18 PM, V13 (Certified Nursing Assistant/CNA) rendered peri-care to R25. After R25 voided, V13 proceeded to clean R25's peri-area from front to back, then assisted R25 with repositioning, and pulled R25's brief and pants back up while wearing the same soiled gloves. 2. On 6/06/23 at 1:48 PM, V13 and V14 (CNA) rendered incontinence care to R16 who was wet with urine and had a bowel movement. V13 changed gloves from dirty to clean task without performing hand hygiene all throughout the incontinence care. On 6/06/23 at 2:55 PM, V4 (Director of Nursing/DON) stated every time that staff enters the resident's room, the staff must perform hand hygiene, and don gloves. If at any point of the care, the gloves get contaminated the staff must remove the soiled…
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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| REST HAVEN ILLIANA CHRISTIAN CONVALESCENT HOME | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 05/05/2004 |
| BREEMS, TIM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| BUIKEMA, PAUL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| DAMSTRA, EDWARD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/02/2022 |
| DEGRAFF, DAVE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| FEENSTRA, THEODORE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/02/2022 |
| JABAAY, PATRICIA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/02/2022 |
| KATS, STEVEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/11/2025 |
| KOLDENHOVEN, ARNOLD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| LEO, GARY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| PETROELJE, ROB | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| VAN ESSEN, DARREN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/02/2022 |
| VAN SOLKEMA, KEVIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/11/2025 |
| VOSS, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/02/2022 |
| WOO, ERIC | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| YONKER, KYLE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| ZANDSTRA, JOHANNA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/21/2012 |
| DE YOUNG, WILLIAM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| PUDWILL, CASEY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/27/2025 |
| VANDERGENUGTEN, BARRY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/01/2012 |
| YUNEZ, KARIM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 21 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner 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 $410K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
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
CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Illinois Medicaid page for homes that do.
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 146155. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-25, 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.