No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Lake Forest Place

1100 Pembridge Drive, Lake Forest, IL 60045 · Non profit - Corporation · 50 certified beds · (847) 604-6701 Medicare only — no Medicaid

Call the home — (847) 604-6701 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
2 actual-harm citations
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • 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 (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has 2 actual-harm citations
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
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

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1000 N Westmoreland Rd · (847) 535-6150 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1000 N Westmoreland Rd, Retail A · (847) 810-8441 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
201 Waukegan Rd · (847) 735-0026 · Call to confirm hours
Park
200 Maclaren Ln · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1380 N Waukegan Rd · (847) 234-4859

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 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased23.4%13.4%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight10.6%6.3%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.7%0.9%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms4.0%54.2%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.6%3.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.6%14.3%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication17.0%18.3%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.6%91.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.4%4.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.0%20.6%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table32.8%21.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.9%2.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.0%63.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission30.8%26.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.1%13.9%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.442.021.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.962.221.80better

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.

66.5% 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 505 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

66.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
35.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.45U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.25hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 35.2% 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 145 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 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 76% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 40% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF66.5%CMS range 62.6–69.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.0%CMS range 7.9–12.610.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge35.2%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge39.3%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge22.1%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified98.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge98.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.0%CMS range 4.1–8.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.841.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

2.38
RN hours/ resident / day
0.26
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.91
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.55
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
1.84
RN hoursweekends
33.3%
Total nursing turnover
25.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 47.4 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 2.38 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.91 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 4.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.82 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 2.60 to 1.84 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-12-12)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-01-11)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

15 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2025-02-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a safe resident transfer and failed to ensure incontinence care was provided in a safe manner to prevent a fall. This failure resulted in R1 falling from bed during incontinence care and sustaining a femur fracture. This applies to 2 of 3 residents (R1 and R2) reviewed for safety in the sample of 3. The findings include: 1. R1's Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] shows that her cognition is impaired, her vision is highly impaired, she is always incontinent of urine and stool, weighs 180 pounds and is dependent (Helper does all of the effort. Resident does none of the effort to complete the activity) for rolling left and right. On 2/26/25 at 11:24 AM, R1 was laying in bed. V5, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) and V4, Registered Nurse (RN) provided incontinence care to R1. R1 was confused and did not help with turning during the care. R1 was totally dependent on the staff during the care. R1 had a wound vac attached to her left…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2023-03-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure fall risk interventions were in place for a resident (R27) at risk for falls with a history of falls. This failure contributed to R27 falling and sustaining a impacted and comminuted left femur fracture and a dislocated left knee. This applies to 1 of 13 residents reviewed for safety in the sample of 13. The findings include: R27's face sheet shows she has diagnoses including: history of falling, unsteadiness on feet, need for assistance with personal care, dizziness and reduced mobility. R27's 10/24/23 fall risk assessment shows she is at high risk for falls. R27's active care plan effective 6/1/2022 shows that she is alert and oriented x 2-3 but forgetful, at risk for falls, has an unsteady gait and needs limited to total assist of 1-2 staff with her activities of daily living. A intervention effective 6/1/2022 shows R27's bed should be in the lowest and locked position. R27's fall risk care plan shows she had a fall from bed on 10/24/22 and an…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure R1, who is dependent on the staff for bed mobility, did not fall out of bed while the staff was providing care for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for falls in the sample of 3.The findings include:On 06/03/2026 at 10:29AM, R1 was lying in the bed on an air mattress.On 06/03/2026 at 10:29AM, R1 stated, the nurse was changing me. I was lying on the edge of the bed, then she grabbed ahold of the sheet underneath me, she pulled it out and it shot me over the side. She was alone, she should have had another staff member, usually there are two assisting me in bed. Luckly I was not seriously hurt, I do have bruises from the fall.On 06/04/2026 at 12:20PM, V4 CNA-Certified Nursing Assistant said, I was changing R1 by myself. I turned the top part of R1's body, I was not able to get to the other side to stop him from sliding off the bed.On 06/03/2026 at 12:52PM, V2 DON-Director of Nursing said, on 05/26/2026 I was told the CNA was changing R1…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and implement swallowing precautions for a resident at risk for choking for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for safety and supervision in the sample of 3.The findings include:On 4/23/26 at 9:37 AM, R1 was well-groomed, seated in his wheelchair in the foyer. R1 leaned to his right side, he was slow to respond, and had some drool in the right corner of his mouth. R1 said he had some trouble swallowing a few days ago. R1 said he was taking big bites and eating too fast. R1 said he couldn't catch his breath, and the staff had to help him. R1 stated, I wouldn't say they saved my life, but they helped. R1 said he was eating pureed food when he choked. At 12 PM, R1 was feeding himself pureed turkey chili, garden vegetables, corn bread, and fries with a spoon. V5 (Restorative Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was positioned next to R1, watching him. R1 attempted to take big bites and eat quickly. V5 provided verbal cues…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place for a resident with a history of falls for 1 of 15 residents (R7) reviewed for safety in the sample of 15.The findings include:R7's Face Sheet printed on 1/26/26 listed a history of falling as a diagnosis.R7's Fall Care Plan with an initiated date of 7/7/24 showed R7 had fallen while at the facility and had a history of falling out of bed. Listed under interventions was the use a floor mattress. On 1/26/26 at 10:14 AM, R7 was in bed. There was no floor mattress on the floor next to R7's bed. The floor mattress was lying up against the wall near the head of the bed. There were no staff members, family, or care givers in the room. On 1/27/26 at 12:07 PM, V10 (Certified Nursing Assistant) said floor mattresses should be placed on the floor next to the bed when the resident is in bed.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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 interview and record review the facility failed to secure narcotic medication after delivery from the pharmacy. This applies to one of three residents (R1) in the sample of seven reviewed for medication storage.The findings include:The facility reported incident report dated 8/4/2025 shows a narcotic was delivered to the facility from the pharmacy on 8/2/2025 at 7:11 AM for R1. On 8/4/2025 the narcotics could not be located.The facility face sheet for R1 shows she was admitted to the facility after a stay in the hospital for pneumonia and respiratory failure. R1 had a Physicians order for hydrocodone (narcotic pain medication) to be used as needed for pain. R1 was discharged from the facility on 8/4/2025 as planned. On 8/13/2025 at 10:30 AM the door to the nursing station was locked. V7 Unit Secretary came and unlocked the door for this surveyor and said, It's locked today because the state is in the building.On 8/13/2025 at 10:01 AM, V3 Registered Nurse said she was the day shift supervisor working the morning of 8/2/2025 when the narcotic was delivered from the pharmacy.…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-12-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure dishes were washed in a manner to prevent cross-contamination and failed store thickener in a manner to prevent cross-contamination. This affects all 44 residents residing in the facility. The findings include: The facility's CMS 671 Form dated 12/10/24 shoed there were 44 residents residing in the facility. 1. On 12/10/24 at 10:08 AM, the surveyor, V3 (Dietitian), V4 (Director of Dining Services), and V8 (Dietary Manager) returned to the main kitchen. The dishwashing area was inside the door, to the left. The dishwashing station was a small square shaped area, with an opening to enter the area. The dirty dishes were stacked to the left of the dishwasher and directly across the area, from the dishwasher. The clean dishes were removed from the right side of the dishwasher and stacked against the adjacent wall. The 3 compartment sink was positioned to the right of the clean dishes (or on the opposite wall from the dishwasher). The additional dirty dishes were stacked at the end of the 3 compartment sink.…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-12 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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 check placement of a feeding tube prior to administering a nutritional supplement for 1 of 1 resident (R25) reviewed for feeding tubes in the sample of 12. The findings include: R25's face sheet printed on 12/12/24 showed diagnoses including but not limited to Parkinson's disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), dementia, epilepsy, and protein-calorie malnutrition. R25's facility assessment dated [DATE] showed severe cognitive impairment and the use of a G tube for nutrition (gastrostomy tube-soft, plastic feeding tube that goes into the stomach). R25's December 2024 order summary report showed an order start dated 7/2/24 for: .enteral feeding give 1 carton (237 milliliters) of Jevity 1.5 calorie at noon per G tube . The same report showed orders start dated 7/1/24 to check placement of the G tube before administering medication or feedings. On 12/11/24 at 1:27 PM, V9 (Registered Nurse) administered R25's enteral feeding while he was in…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure PPE (personal protective equipment) was worn in a manner to prevent cross contamination for 1 of 1 resident (R8) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 12. The findings include: On 12/10/24 at 11:19 AM, R8 had a PPE bin outside the door. There was a large sign on the door of the room that said, STOP Enhanced Barrier Precautions. The signage had illustrations to show gloves and gowns must be worn during high-contact resident care activities. The care activities included but were not limited to: dressing, transferring, and assisting with toileting when a urinary catheter was in use. This surveyor entered the room and R8 was standing at the sink while brushing his teeth. V11 (CNA-Certified Nurse Aide) was in the bathroom and wearing only gloves. V11 assisted R8 across the room using a gait belt and walker, then transferred him to an upright recliner. V11 emptied the garbage can and exited the room. V11 was not wearing a gown…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-14 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure resident dignity was maintained during dining for 1 of 6 residents (R1) reviewed for dignity in the sample of 6. The findings include: R1's face sheet printed on 8/14/24 showed diagnoses including but not limited to atrial fibrillation, pulmonary embolism, malnutrition, Alzheimer's Disease, and dementia. R1's facility assessment dated [DATE] showed severe cognitive impairment and substantial/maximal staff assistance needed for eating. On 8/14/24 at 1:51 PM, V8 (R1's daughter) stated she was visiting R1 on the morning of 7/8/24 and found her seated in the group dining room wearing only a hospital type nightgown. V8 said R1 had a blanket draped over her shoulder's but nothing over the rest of her. V8 said she absolutely brought clothes to the facility including pajamas, the day prior. V8 said she immediately complained to staff. V8 was told that R1 was restless during the early morning hours and was taken to the nurse station in her nightgown.…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-14 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a homelike environment by allowing a damaged nightstand to remain in a resident room for 1 of 6 residents (R4) reviewed for environment in the sample of 6. The findings include: On 8/14/24 at 1:51 PM, V8 stated her aunt was a resident at the facility for about one week in July 2024. V8 said the nightstand in the room was damaged during the entire time. The top handle was hanging off and the left upper corner was missing a section. V8 said staff were repeatedly in and out of the room but the nightstand was never repaired or replaced. On 8/14/24 at 10:44 AM, the facility nightstand in the same room V8's aunt had resided in was observed. The handle was still falling off and the left, upper corner was heavily damaged. R4 was the resident currently residing in the room. R4 said it had been that way since she arrived at the facility. On 8/14/24 at 1:32 PM, V5 (Maintenance Technician) stated he was unaware of any complaints or work repair orders for the nightstand. V5 said items like nightstands can typically…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-08 · tag F0811 — isolated
    Ensure that residents are assessed for appropriateness for a feeding assistant program, receive services as per their plan of care, and feeding assistants are trained and supervised.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident with a complicated feeding problem was assisted to eat by a qualified staff member for 1 of 3 residents (R3) reviewed for safe dining in the sample of 3. The findings include: On 05/08/24 at 11:35AM, V6 Resident Assistant was providing R3 bites of pureed food with a spoon. On 05/08/24 at 11:35AM, V6 said, this is R3. I am an Activity Specialist; I am not a CNA-Certified Nursing Assistant. I am trained to feed residents as a Resident Assistant. On 5/08/24 at 1:13PM, V7 Speech Therapist said, R3 has a treatment diagnosis of dysphagia related to age, Alzheimer's (disease), and dementia. Because of his Alzheimer's (disease) he is at risk for choking if he is not fed appropriately. The problem I was treating R3 for is an oropharyngeal dysphagia (difficulty moving food in the mouth in preparation to be swallowed and moving the food safely past the trachea without aspiration into the lungs). R3's current Physicians Orders dated May 2024 shows, multiple diagnoses including dysphagia. Diet Orders:…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure urinary catheter bags were kept from resting on the floor and failed to secure the catheter tubing for 2 of 3 residents (R197 and R38) reviewed for catheters in the sample of 12. The findings include: On 1/8/24 at 11:22 AM, R197's urinary catheter bag was lying directly on the floor on the right side of her bed. On 1/8/24 at 11:41 AM, R38's urinary catheter bag was attached to her bed frame and her bed was low to the floor, therefore, resting directly on the floor, uncovered. On 1/8/24 at 2:03 PM, V6 and V7, Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) provided incontinence care to R38. R38's catheter tubing was not secured in any manner and was taut. After completing incontinence care, V6 and V7 positioned R38 on her back with the unsecured catheter tubing placed under her left leg. The drainage bag was hung on the bed frame, the bed was lowered and again the drainage bag was resting directly on the floor. On 1/8/24 at 2:31 PM, R197's…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-03-08 · tag F0661 — isolated
    Ensure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
    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 the discharge process was completed for a resident who left against medical advice for 1 of 2 residents (R42) reviewed for discharge in the sample of 13. The findings include: On 3/8/23 at 9:30 AM, R42 was not observed in the facility. R42's Progress Note dated 12/15/22 shows admitted [AGE] year old female from hospital brought in by family in wheelchair with diagnosis of urinary tract infection, possible pneumonia, dementia with history of hypertension, heart murmur. There are no other progress notes in R42's electronic medical record. The facility census dated 3/6/23 does not contain R42. On 03/08/23 at 9:40 AM, V2 Director of Nursing (DON) stated I'm not sure what happened to R42. I will have to ask the admitting nurse. R42 is not here currently. R42's Face sheet dated 3/8/23 shows R42 was admitted [DATE] at 2:24 PM and then discharged [DATE] at 5:00 PM. On 03/08/23 at 9:54 AM, V2 said he spoke with V5 Registered Nurse who…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a residents insulin vial was stored with open/expiration dates for 1 of 13 residents (R146) reviewed for medication storage in sample of 13. The findings include: R146's Face Sheet printed on 3/7/23 showed R146 to be an [AGE] year old female admitted to the facility with diagnoses which include: disease of pancreas and type 2 diabetes mellitus. R146's Physician Order Sheet printed 3/7/23 showed R146 having a short acting insulin order for 6 units three times a day in addition to a sliding scale dose before meals. On 3/6/23 at 11:45 AM, V5 Registered Nurse (RN) opened the med cart. R146's vial of short acting insulin was opened with no open date or expiration date written on the vial or the storage bag. V5 stated the nurse who opened the vial should have put an open and expiration date on the vial. The expiration date is 28 days after opening for insulin. On 3/8/23 at 11:25 AM, V10 Nursing Supervisor (RN) stated when an insulin vial…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
PRESBYTERIAN HOMESOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 12/01/2015
BAILEY, BARBARAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/27/2016
ICHINOSE, KELLYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/03/2023
JACOBSON, LYDIAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/18/2024
LIGGETT, ANNAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2005
MADAL, ANTHONYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/23/2023
PATEL, ALPANAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/10/2018
VANBERKEL, CAROLIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/03/2022
BRAULT, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/24/2022
DEARBORN, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2023
DENISON, CHARLESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 12/01/2015
HITE, ELINORIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2017
KELLY, VINCENTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/01/2017
LINCOLN, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2021
MARX, DENNIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 12/01/2015
MCAFEE, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2019
MOLLMAN, ERICIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/24/2022
OBERREIDER, MARSHAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/22/2024
REYNOLDS, SAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2024
SEYMOUR, JULIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2021
STRAUSBAUGH, JESSICAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2023
WETZEL, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2021
ABI-ANTOUN, NADIMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2023
HAVRILKA, MARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2015
PRESBYTERIAN HOMES MANAGER LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2015
FAMILARA, CEAZARIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/10/2022
MILLER, CHERYLIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/04/2015
PRATT, PATRICIAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/24/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 41 rows in the source record cover these 28 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 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.

$11.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-12.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$719K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 0%Medicare 34%Other / private 66%

This home reported $719K 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 2024. 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

$762per resident / day
operating cost
$23,177per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$677per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Illinois
$8,304/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$9,216/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,219/mo
Assisted living

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 145986. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-12-12, 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.

What to do next