Glenview Terrace
1511 Greenwood Road, Glenview, IL 60025 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 314 certified beds · (847) 729-9090 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jan 2026
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $67,830 in federal fines (most recent 2026-05-02)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 4.6% | 13.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.6% | 6.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 0.9% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 99.6% | 54.2% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 2.1% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.5% | 14.3% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.7% | 18.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.0% | 91.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.3% | 4.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 18.6% | 20.6% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.4% | 21.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.1% | 2.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 77.9% | 63.1% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.1% | 26.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.9% | 13.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.59 | 2.02 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.21 | 2.22 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
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.
57.1% 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 856 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 54.7% 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 342 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 49% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 34% 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 | 57.1%CMS range 53.9–59.7 | 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 | 10.8%CMS range 8.6–13.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 54.7% | 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 | 52.6% | 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 | 47.7% | 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 | 99.6% | 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 | 98.1% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.1% | 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 | 0.2% | 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 | 7.1%CMS range 5.0–8.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.86 | 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 314 beds and averages 252.7 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 61 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 3.68 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.02 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 is below 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 3.46 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.76 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.04 to 0.97 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% 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 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.
17 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-05-02 · 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 follow its elopement policy by not responding to the wander guard alarm immediately and by not conducting a head count to confirm whether anyone had eloped. The facility also failed to implement the elopement risk care plan interventions, as they did not frequently monitor R1.The Immediate Jeopardy began on 4/23/26 at 9:42:57 pm when R1 exited through the front door.Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 4/28/26. V1 (Administrator) and V13 (Nurse Consultant) were notified of the IJ on 4/28/26 at 12:15 PM. Although the immediacy was removed on 5/1/26, the facility remains out of compliance at a Severity Level II due to the need to evaluate the implementation of policies, procedures, audits, and Quality Assurance monitoring.The Findings include:R1 is an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with severe cognitive impairment as per the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE]. R1 was admitted to the third-floor locked unit, which required a security key code for…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-04-06 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent serious injury to a resident. This failure affects one of three residents (R1) reviewed for falls in a total sample of six residents. This failure resulted in injuries to R1. R1 sustained facial fractures and skull fractures, acute nondisplaced fractures of bilateral sphenoid sinuses, non-displaced fractures of basilar portion of the occipital bone bilaterally, and acute nondisplaced fractures involving the postero-lateral walls of bilateral maxillary sinuses. R1 also had a small possible C6 fracture requiring a neck collar. R1 is a [AGE] year-old male. R1's diagnoses are but not limited to fracture at the base of the skull, eye bone fracture, Parkinsonism, heart disease, atrial fibrillation, history of falling, diabetes, high blood pressure, dementia, and hypothyroidism. R1's BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) dated 3/18/2025, notes R1 is not very alert. R1's care plan notes R1 is at high…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-05-14 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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 observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to protect cognitively impaired residents from physical and verbal abuse; and failed to follow the facility abuse policy for two (R1 and R2) of three residents reviewed for abuse. These failures resulted in R1 and R2 being physically and verbally abused during provision of care. R1 and R2 were sent to the hospital for further evaluation and treatment and R2 sustained a right frontal hematoma and abrasion, left lateral periorbital ecchymosis and lower lip abrasion. These failures resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy. The Immediate Jeopardy was identified on [DATE] when R1 and R2 were physically and verbally abused by V5 (Certified Nurse Aide) during provision of care. V1 (Administrator), V2 (Executive Director) and V3 (Director of Nursing) were notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on [DATE] at 12:00 PM. The survey team confirmed by observation, interviews and record reviews that the Immediate Jeopardy was removed on [DATE], but noncompliance…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident's dignity was maintained related to having a choice of a different breakfast alternative menu for one of three residents (R2) reviewed for residents rights. Findings Include:On 2/13/2026 at 12:00pm R2 said the dietary department will not allow the residents to have an alternative to breakfast waffles. They can only have toast white or wheat not pancakes and if she wants an extra meat instead of waffles dietary will not allow an extra meat. On 2/13/2026 at 1:30pm V6(Dietary Supervisor) said the facility does provide a breakfast alternative. It does not have pancakes and that the facility does not alternate waffles for an meat alternative, the alternative for waffles is white or wheat toast. On 2/16/2026 at 10:10am V1(Executive Director) said she was not aware that the resident's wanted pancakes instead of waffles and that the residents can have pancakes as an alternative.On 2/1/2026 at 10:30am V2(Director of Nursing) said all residents have the choice of a liberal diet and can ask for an alternative of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0691 — failed to provide colostomy / ostomy care — isolatedProvide appropriate colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure colostomy care was provided for a dependent resident for one (R2) of two reidents reviewed for Colostomy Care.Findings Include:On 2/13/2026 at 12:00pm, R2 said that on 2/1/2026 at about 8:00pm she put on her call light and about 10-15 minutes later V11(Agency Certified Nursing Assistant-CNA) arrived and I asked her to empty my colostomy bag, V11 said she didn't feel comfortable. R2 said she asked V11 to inform the nurse because her colostomy bag was filling up. R2 said after about 30 minutes she put on her call light, V11 returned and said she asked the CNA's but not the nurse, and said she would ask the nurse. R2 said at 9:00pm she called the receptionist and asked her to page the supervisor over head she needed assistance and the receptionist sent R2 to the unit manager voice mail whom only works in the morning and not on weekends. R2 said she called the receptionist again and again she was sent to another voice mail. After the third time calling the receptionist, R2 said she called 911 emergency. When they arrived…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-08 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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 its abuse prevention policy by not providing an environment free from abuse to protect one resident (R2) from physical abuse by another resident (R1), resulting in R2 being hit several times by R1. Findings include:R1 was an [AGE] year-old former resident of the facility, deceased [DATE], with medical diagnosis including but not limited to encounter for palliative care; cognitive communication deficit; anxiety disorder; and depression.R2 is an [AGE] year-old resident of the facility with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15, with medical diagnosis including but not limited to unspecified fracture of first lumbar vertebra; nondisplaced fracture of sternal end of right clavicle; displaced simple supracondylar fracture without intercondylar fracture of left humerus; and history of falling.On [DATE] at 10:18 AM, R2 said he was asleep in bed at night on [DATE], when his roommate, R1, fell from his wheelchair to the ground,…
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 · D2025-06-13 · 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 ensure ongoing monitoring and assessment to identify suprapubic stoma site drainage and skin impairment and obtain appropriate treatment from the Physician. This deficiency affects one (R195) of three residents in the sample of 35 reviewed for Suprapubic catheter care management and quality of care. Findings include: On 6/11/25 at 9:27AM, observed R195 lying in bed with low air loss mattress. V19 CNA (Certified Nurse Assistant) lifted the top sheet and observed R195's disposable brief soaked with serosanguineous drainage on suprapubic area. V19 opened his brief and observed no dressing on suprapubic catheter site with moderate amount of serosanguineous drainage. The stoma site and surrounding skin noted with redness and irritation. The suprapubic catheter is not secured to the abdomen. The catheter is connected to the urinary drainage bag covered with privacy bag. R195 denied any pain. He said that he had a shower yesterday and did not have dressing after it was removed for the shower. R195 said that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-13 · 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 ensure low air loss mattress devices were on the correct weight setting for residents who are at risk for developing pressure injuries. This failure has the potential to affect three (R61, R186 and R200) out of four residents reviewed for pressure injury prevention and treatment in a final sample of 35 residents. Findings Include: 1. On 6/10/25 at 12:50PM, observed R61 in bed with low air loss mattress in use. Air loss mattress is set to 7. Confirmed with V25 (Unit Nurse Manager) that the setting is on 7. V25 looked at a paper with R61's weight record and reset the mattress to 4. R61 is 116.0 lbs. dated 6/10/25. R61 Braden Scale and Clinical Evaluation dated 6/5/25, reads: High Risk 7.0 and R61 with history of healed pressure injuries to left and right buttocks and coccyx. On 6/12/25 at 10:30AM, V8 (Wound Care Coordinator) stated that R61 does not have any active pressure injury at this time, however R61 has a history of pressure injury.…
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 · D2025-06-13 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
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 have an ordered narcotic pain medication available for five and a half hours for a resident (R330) with severe pain and the facility failed to utilize a pain assessment tool for a cognitively impaired/non-verbal resident (R186) for pain management for two out of four residents reviewed for pain in a total sample of 35. Findings Include: 1. R330 is a [AGE] year old with the following diagnosis: lupus erythematosus; fibromyalgia; fracture of the right humerus, right tibia, and right fibula; and wedge compression fracture of the T11-T12 vertebra. On 6/11/25 at 11:10 AM, R330 stated R330 was hit by a car which fractured R330's right arm and lower right leg. R330 reported they live with chronic pain due to R330's lupus diagnosis. R330 stated R330 normally lives at a pain level of seven out of ten with scheduled pain medication. R330 reported the best pain relief is the narcotic pain medication which is ordered as needed so R330 has 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 · Dcited before2025-06-13 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure an accurate count of controlled medication on the controlled drug administration record sheet. This deficiency affects 1 of 3 medication carts reviewed for Controlled Medication count Management. The facility also failed to follow its policy on medication administration on prohibiting pre-pouring of medications. This deficiency affects two (R110 and R525) of twelve residents in the sample of 35 reviewed for administration of medication. Findings include: On 6/10/25 at 9:10AM, checked medication cart with V4 LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse). Observed pre-poured medications in plastic medication cup inside the top drawer and controlled/narcotic drawer. V4 said that she prepared the medication for R525 and R110. V4 said that she is about to give the medication, but she answered another resident's call light. V4 said that she should not pre-pour the medications. Medications prepared should be given to the resident immediately. Reviewed and counted controlled/narcotic medications with V4. Observed…
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 · D2025-06-13 · 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 use appropriate infection control practices when taking blood pressure during medication administration. This deficiency affects one (R526) of one resident observed taking blood pressure during medication administration observation in the sample of 35 reviewed for Infection Prevention and Control Program. Findings include: On 6/10/25 at 12:28PM, V7 Agency LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) said that he has to take BP (blood pressure) of R526 before administering her medications. V7 placed the BP cuff on upper arm of R526 without disinfecting the BP monitor portable machine prior to use. V7 obtained 110/75mmHg. After taking the BP, he placed the BP portable machine on top of the medication cart without disinfecting it after using. V7 prepared medication for R526 and administered the medication orally. On 6/10/25 at 12:34PM, V7 Agency LPN said that he is done with his noon time scheduled medications administration. V7 pushed his medication cart in front of the nursing station. V7 still did not disinfect the BP…
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 · F2024-05-14 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — widespreadEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
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 provide care in accordance with professional standards of quality by a) failing to protect residents to be free from physical and verbal abuse; and failing to follow abuse policies and procedures. These failures affected two (R1 and R2) of three residents reviewed for abuse and has the potential to affect all 234 residents currently residing in the facility. Findings include: Per facility census, there are 234 residents currently residing in the facility. R1 is an [AGE] year-old, male, admitted in the facility on 02/19/24 with diagnoses of Delusional Disorders; Dementia in other Diseases, Classified Elsewhere, Severe, with Psychotic Disturbance and Alzheimer's Disease, Unspecified. R1's MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 02/22/24 recorded a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 2 which means severe cognitive impairment. Social Services assessment dated [DATE] indicated R1 is at risk for abuse. On 04/30/24 at 10:58 AM, V4 (RN) was…
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 · D2024-05-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
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 develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for abuse for two (R1 and R2) of three residents reviewed for abuse. Findings include: R1 is an [AGE] year-old resident admitted to facility on 02/19/2024 with medical diagnoses including but not limited to: Dementia, Major Depressive Disorder, Generalized Anxiety, Alzheimer's Disease, and Delusional Disorder. R1's MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 02/22/24 recorded a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 2 which means severe cognitive impairment. Social Service user defined assessment (UDA) with effective date of 04/18/2024 scores resident a 2+ for abuse/neglect which means at risk for abuse/neglect. R1's care plan for abuse/neglect was initiated 04/29/24 which was three days after an abuse allegation. R2 is an [AGE] year-old resident admitted to facility on 02/14/2023 with diagnoses including but not limited to: Dementia, Generalized Anxiety and Parkinson's Disease. MDS dated…
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 before2024-02-23 · 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 administer medications in a timely manner for 1 of 3 residents (R4) reviewed for medication administration in the sample of 27. The findings include: R4's Physician Order Sheet dated 11/23 showed R4 has an order of Atorvastatin (cholesterol medications), Tylenol and Tramadol (both pain medications.) R4's electronic medication administration record showed that R4 has an order of Atorvastatin 20 milligram (mg) to be given at 2100 (9 PM). R4's Tylenol order of 325 mg 2 tabs every 6 hours to be given at midnight, 6 AM, 12 PM and 6 PM. R4's Tramadol order of 60 mg, 1 tab four times a day to be given at midnight, 6 AM, 12 PM and 6 PM. On 2/23/24 at 10:15 AM, V14 (R4's granddaughter) said that on 11/6/23, R4's 6 PM medications were given very late or were not given at all. V14 said she looked for the nurse who told her he was busy taking care of so many residents and was not sure when he would be able to give R4's 6 PM medications. R4's Medication Audit Report dated 11/6/23 showed R4 got her Atorvastatin 9 PM dose at (2345) 11:45…
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 · D2023-10-06 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to follow their Privacy, Dignity and Discharge Planning and Instruction policy when a resident was discharged ; and another resident's medication was found in the discharge medication pile. This deficient practice affects one resident (R3) of three residents reviewed for privacy and confidentiality and discharge medication. Findings Include: R2 discharged from the facility on 9/29/23. On 10/5/23 at 11:00 AM, V6 (Complainant) reported that R2 received R3's one medication upon review of medication when already home. V6 was able to give the information from the medication label, such as R3's full name, medication name, direction, and prescription number (Rx # XXXXXXXX). V6 also reported that she informed the facility of this incident on 10/2/23 (Monday). Concern form dated 10/3/23, reads in part: R2 was discharged on 9/29/23 and was sent home with a medication which does not belong to R2. Action taken: Spoke with Nurse and education one to one was given regarding medication reconciliation during discharge. Resident/Responsible…
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 · E2023-03-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to follow their policy and procedures for providing care and services in a timely manner by not ensuring nursing staff respond to call lights in a timely manner. This failure applied to four (R343, R443, R445, R446) of four residents reviewed for assistance with activities of daily living. Findings include: On 03/06/23 at 10:44 AM R343 stated she has been at the facility with diarrhea for 3 days. R343 stated sometimes it takes 40 minutes for someone to respond to her call light when she uses it for incontinence care. On 03/06/23 at 12:50 PM R443 stated no one ever gets her out of bed other than for therapy and she stopped using her call light because no one ever responds. On 03/06/23 at 12:03 PM R445 stated he threw up on himself after eating lunch one day and pressed his call light for assistance. R445 stated it took 20-30 minutes for someone to respond to clean him up. R445 stated sometimes it takes this long for a response to his call light. On 03/06/23 at 11:00 AM R446 stated, this morning it took an hour for someone to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-09 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide documentation of administering a narcotic medication that was in use. This failure applied to one resident (R121) whom was reviewed during medication storage and labeling. Findings include: R121 is an [AGE] year old male who was admitted to the facility 7/1/22 with diagnoses that include Alzheimer's, Dementia. According to R121's MDS (Minimum Data Set) he exhibits severe cognitive impairments scoring a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) of 2 out of 15. According to Physicians Order Sheet (POS) dated 2/17/23 R121 has been receiving hospice services while living in the facility. On 03/08/23 3:50 PM, during medication and storage review with V19 LPN, lorazepam 1mg/ml gel narcotic sheet for this resident was found in the narcotic control book and the medication was not on the cart. V19 said that they did not know where the medication was located at that time. Surveyor and V19 checked the medication cart and the refrigerator. At…
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
$67,830 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $67,830 — penalty dated 2026-05-02
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 LEGACY HEALTHCARE — 89 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 88 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 88; lowest-rated first.
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
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DOROS GENERATION TRUST U/A/D 1/3/12 | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 20% | since 12/14/2023 |
| GPN FAMILY TRUST U/A/D 4/28/08 | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 48% | since 12/14/2023 |
| OAKWAY OPERATIONS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 12% | since 12/14/2023 |
| RAJCHENBACH 2015 FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 20% | since 12/14/2023 |
| FORBRIGHT BANK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 12/14/2023 |
| GLENVIEW TERRACE PROPERTY, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/14/2023 |
| SHABAT, MENACHEM | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/14/2023 |
| LEGACY HEALTHCARE FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/18/2025 |
| ZIMMERMAN, RAPHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/14/2023 |
| RSM US LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 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 $3.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Illinois Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 145268. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-13, 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.