Citadel At Saint Benedict
6930 West Touhy Avenue, Niles, IL 60714 · For profit - Corporation · 99 certified beds · (847) 647-0003 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jan 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 4 actual-harm citations
- the CMS record shows $64,531 in federal fines (most recent 2025-01-06)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 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 | 8.2% | 13.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.7% | 6.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 81.8% | 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 | 1.1% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.5% | 14.3% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.0% | 18.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.2% | 91.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.5% | 4.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 15.6% | 20.6% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 18.4% | 21.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 2.2% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 86.6% | 63.1% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.8% | 26.1% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.0% | 13.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.94 | 2.02 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.68 | 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.
53.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 241 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 39.8% 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 98 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 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 71% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% 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 | 53.6%CMS range 46.2–60.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 7.2–13.0 | 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 | 39.8% | 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 | 46.9% | 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 | 36.7% | 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 | 97.6% | 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 | 96.9% | 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 | 96.8% | 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 | 1.8% | 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 | 1.2% | 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 | 9.4%CMS range 6.7–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.05 | 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 99 beds and averages 91.2 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.53 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.85 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.09 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 3.06 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.72 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.02 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-01-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement individualized plan of care interventions to reduce the risk of injury from falls. This failure affects two of four residents (R1, R2) reviewed for falls. These failures resulted in R1 being left unsupervised in the dining room and was later observed on the floor with an abrasion to the head. R1 was sent to the hospital and diagnosed with three compression fractures of the thoracic spine. These failures also resulted in R2 rolling out of bed, landing on R2's buttocks on the floor, and was subsequently diagnosed with a left comminuted hip fracture. Findings include: The facility's policy titled accidents and incidents: supervision, investigating and reporting dated 11/2023 denotes in-part the facility provides an environment that is free from accident hazards over which the facility has control. The facility provides supervision and assistive devices to each resident to prevent avoidable accidents. This includes identifying hazard…
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 before2024-06-30 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to protect a residents' right to be free from verbal, physical and mental abuse by an employee. This failure affected one (R1) of four residents in the sample reviewed for abuse. This failure resulted in R1 feeling unhappy, fearful, and not wanting to have her daughter leave her alone at the facility. Findings include: R1's diagnosis includes: Anemia, unspecified, Hypothyroidism, unspecified, Type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications Hyperlipidemia, unspecified, Essential (primary) hypertension Athscl heart disease of native coronary artery w/o Cardiomyopathy, unspecified Acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, Gastritis osteoarthritis, unspecified site Muscle weakness (generalized). R1's MDS dated [DATE] BIMS - 15 (indicating cognitively intact) Facility's reportable to state agency regarding R1 documents in part: The resident was admitted on [DATE]th, 2024 with the above diagnoses. The writer and administrator was notified by 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-06-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to safely transfer a resident (R1) using a mechanical lift and failed to follow the facility procedure for use of a mechanical lift for one (R1) of four residents. The facility failure to follow the mechanical lift transfer safety guidelines resulted in injury to R1 who sustained bruises during a one-person staff transfer. Findings include: R1's diagnosis includes: Anemia, unspecified, Hypothyroidism, unspecified, Type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications Hyperlipidemia, unspecified, Essential (primary) hypertension Athscl heart disease of native coronary artery w/o Cardiomyopathy, unspecified Acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, Gastritis osteoarthritis, unspecified site Muscle weakness (generalized). Facility's reportable to state agency regarding R1 documents in part: The resident was admitted on [DATE]th, 2024, with the above diagnoses. The writer and administrator was notified by the nursing staff that the resident complained of inappropriate…
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 · G2024-05-16 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide 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 interview and record review the facility failed to monitor and assess for signs of urinary catheter obstruction and monitor urine output for one (R21) of one resident reviewed for urinary tract infections on the sample list of 37. This failure resulted in R21's emergent hospitalization and diagnosis of severe sepsis and acute kidney injury. Findings include: R21 is a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including but not limited to Metabolic Encephalopathy; Alzheimer's Disease; Age related Osteoporosis; Anemia; and Peripheral Vascular Disease. R21's physician order dated 02/01/2024 reads in part, (Urinary) catheter care every shift; Change (Urinary) catheter as needed. R21's care plan reads in part, Problem onset: (R21) has (urinary) catheter to assist in unstageable sacral pressure ulcer. Approaches: Ongoing assessment of color, clarity and character of (R21's) urine; Ongoing assessment of (R21's) for symptoms of urinary [NAME] infection; Change (R21's) catheter…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-05-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to follow policy related to use of three-compartment sink; failed to maintain normal range of chemical concentration in the sanitizer buckets; and failed to properly label and date leftover foods in the refrigerator. These deficiencies potentially affect the 86 residents receiving foods in the kitchen. Findings include: Per census report, facility has 88 residents currently residing in the facility. Two residents are currently on NPO (nothing by mouth). On 05/27/25 at 9:55 AM during initial brief tour in the kitchen, the following leftover food items placed in a bowl covered with plastic, unlabeled, were observed stored in the walk-in refrigerator: drained pineapple - dated 05/21; apple sauce - dated 05/24; dried peas - undated; peaches - dated 05/21; cream of mushroom - dated 05/21. There was also a sandwich with lettuce and tomato unlabeled and undated, which was observed inside reach - in cooler. Subsequently, red sanitizer buckets were also checked. V4 (Account Manager Food Services) stated that red buckets…
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 before2025-05-29 · 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 appropriate and sufficient supervision for a cognitively impaired resident (R45) with a history of falls, reviewed out of a sample of 39 residents. This failure resulted in R45 falling from her wheelchair and hitting her face against the floor, resulting in an injury of abrasions to her forehead. The facility also failed to properly assess R45 for injury and failed to send her to the hospital for evaluation after the incident. Findings include: R45 is a [AGE] year-old cognitively impaired female resident, with medical diagnosis including but not limited to dementia; cognitive communication deficit; unsteadiness on feet; abnormal posture; pain in left hip; and spinal stenosis, cervical region. R45's high risk for falls care plan, dated 05/06/2025, does not address constant close supervision, based oh her history of falls. R45's Fall Risk Assessment, dated 05/26/2055 indicates no falls in the past three months. Per R45's electronic…
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 before2025-05-29 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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 review the facility failed to administer medications per physician's orders for two of five (R24, R61) residents observed during the medication pass in the final sample of 26. There were 29 opportunities with 4 errors resulting in a 13.79% medication error rate. Findings include: R24 is a [AGE] year-old admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including but not limited to Heart Failure; Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease Without Esophagitis; Hereditary And Idiopathic Neuropathy; Hypertensive Heart Disease With Heart Failure; Personal History Of Covid-19; Presence Of Intraocular Lens; Ocular Hypertension, Right Eye; Nonexudative Age-Related Macular Degeneration, Bilateral; Personal History Of Other Malignant Neoplasm Of Rectum, Rectosigmoid Junction, And Anus; Polyneuropathy; Unspecified Atrial Fibrillation; Anemia In Neoplastic Disease; Essential (Primary) Hypertension; and Major Depressive Disorder. R61 is a [AGE] year-old admitted to the facility on [DATE]…
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 · D2025-01-22 · 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
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to administer pain medication as ordered by the physician for one of one resident (R2) reviewed for pain management. Findings include: R2's physician order sheet dated 12/27/24 shows orders for acetaminophen (Pain Relief/Antipyretic) tablet 325mg (milligrams) give 2 tablets by mouth every six hours as needed for pain, fever. Norco (Pain Relief) oral tablet 5-325mg, give one tablet by mouth every 8 hours as needed for pain. On 1/17/25 at 12:30pm ,V3, Registered Nurse (RN) said R2 was moving around in bed when R2 had a fall from R2's bed on 12/27/24 around 3:30pm. V3 said he did not recall the nurse reporting to him that R2 was admitted with a pubis ramus fracture. V3 said R2 did not have pain upon assessment. V3 said he did not administer pain medications to R2. R2's pain level summary denotes in-part on 12/27/24 at 8:07am R2's pain level was 5, on 12/27/24 at 3:46pm R2's pain level was 4, on 12/27/24 at 9:35pm R2's pain level was 4, at 9:36pm R2's pain level was 1 and at 9:37pm R2's pain level was 4. R2's medication…
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 before2025-01-06 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from abuse for 1 of 3 residents (R3) reviewed for abuse in the sample of 6. Findings include: R3's Facesheet dated 1/4/24 showed she had diagnoses to include, but not limited to: metabolic encephalopathy; lack of coordination; abnormalities of gait and mobility; repeated falls; spinal stenosis; unspecified adrenocorticoid insufficiency; congestive heart failure; chronic kidney disease (stage 3A), major depressive disorder; anxiety; and a history of falling. R3's facility assessment dated [DATE] showed she was cognitively intact. R3's Skilled Nursing Evaluation dated 12/15/24 showed she was alert and oriented to person, place, and time; communicated verbally; speech was clear; and was able to understand and be understood. R3's Care Plan initiated 10/21/24 showed, R3 is at risk of possible abuse/neglect related a history of abuse. The interventions included, but were not limited to: Provide me with…
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 · Ecited before2024-05-16 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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 medication error rate of less than 5 percent (%). A medication pass observation on 05/13/2024 revealed 26 medication administration errors out of 31 opportunities, resulting in an 83.87% medication error rate. Findings include: Medication pass observation conducted on 05/13/2024 with V5 and V13 (Agency Registered Nurses) to 3 residents (R6, R7, R33) with the following observations: R7: On 05/13/24 11:28 AM, entered R7's room and observed a small clear plastic medication cup on top of the bedside table that was near the foot of bed which contained nine pills within. When asked whose medications were on the table, R7 stated those are my morning meds. She added that the nurse brought them earlier this morning, but she does not recall her name of nurse or the exact time the pills were left but knows it was before breakfast. R7 then said she knows the nurses are not supposed to leave her medications and she would prefer if the nurse stayed, but they are busy and trust her (R7) enough to take them by…
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 · E2024-05-16 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that medical staff were properly trained to administer prescribed medications according to physician's orders and residents were free from significant medication errors. Three (R6, R7, R34) residents in the sampled medication pass of four residents (R6, R7, R33 and R34) experienced medication administration errors by the medication nurse. Findings include: R34: On 05/13/24 at 10:45 AM, observed R34 sitting in her wheelchair next to the bed with a bedside tray table in front of her. Also observed a clear, plastic medicine cup in front of resident on the bedside table that contained six pills within the cup. R34 said that her nurse had just left them a few minutes ago but she could not recall the nurse's name. She also said that she had already taken a few pills and needs to take the rest of her morning medications. When asked what these morning medications were, R34 said one is for my stomach, two are water pills, and I believe the one green pill is my iron pill. R34 could not remember what the two pink…
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 · D2024-02-01 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based in interview and record review, the facility failed to follow the abuse policy by not notifying the abuse coordinator with allegation of employee-to-resident abuse. This failure affected one (R1) of three reviewed for reporting abuse. Findings include: On 1-30-24 at 12:45 PM, V1 said when there is an allegation of abuse, the staff is expected to report the allegation of abuse to the abuse coordinator immediately. V1 said R1's nurse did not report the allegation of employee-to-resident abuse to her. V1 said she will send a state reportable, suspend staff pending investigation, begin investigation, and in-service staff on reporting abuse allegation. On 1-30-24 at 12:10 PM, V2 (Director of Nursing) said all staff are expected to notify Administrator and Director of Nursing immediately about any allegation of employee-to-resident abuse. V2 said the facility can begin the process of the abuse investigation. V2 said she was not made aware of the employee-to-resident allegation of abuse until told by surveyor. On 1-30-24 at 12:03 PM, V5 (Registered Nurse) said R1 is alert, confused,…
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
$64,531 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $29,660 — penalty dated 2025-01-06
- $34,871 — penalty dated 2024-06-30
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 CITADEL HEALTHCARE — 14 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 | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 3.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 13 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AARON FAMILY INVESTMENT TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 30% | since 09/03/2024 |
| AB INVESTMENT TRUST U/A/D 01/03/23 | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 13% | since 09/03/2024 |
| AARON, JONATHAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/03/2024 |
| GRAF, MARCELLA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/03/2024 |
| KANTER, JEREMY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/03/2024 |
| ROBIN, JASON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/03/2024 |
| TELLER, CHANANEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/03/2024 |
| 6930 TOUHY AVENUE LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/03/2024 |
| ISRAEL FAMILY INVESTMENT TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/24/2024 |
| ISRAEL INVESTMENT TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/24/2024 |
| OMNIA HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/03/2024 |
| TODD A STERN 2015 IRRV INS TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/24/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
7 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% 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 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
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
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 145731. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-29, 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.