Asbury Gardens Nsg & Rehab
212 Airport Road, North Aurora, IL 60542 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 75 certified beds · (630) 896-7778 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (20) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $2,117 in federal fines (most recent 2023-08-21)
- its facility-reported quality-measure 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) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 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 | 17.0% | 13.4% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.8% | 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 | 2.3% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 21.1% | 54.2% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.8% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 35.2% | 14.3% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 13.0% | 18.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 91.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.9% | 4.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 22.6% | 20.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.0% | 21.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 4.6% | 2.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.6% | 63.1% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.8% | 26.1% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.0% | 13.9% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.61 | 2.02 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.36 | 2.22 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
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.
37.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 100 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 61.8% 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 68 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 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 53% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 | 37.9%CMS range 30.7–45.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.8%CMS range 8.5–15.8 | 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 | 61.8% | 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 | 52.9% | 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 | 55.9% | 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 | 98.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.2% | 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 | 8.4%CMS range 4.9–12.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.18 | 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 75 beds and averages 59.8 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 15 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.64 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.96 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.30 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 3.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.89 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.06 to 0.70 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
20 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-12-11 · 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.This failure resulted in R1 sustaining a right leg laceration requiring stitches when V4 (CNA/Certified Nursing Assistant) transferred R1 without a gait belt.This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for resident injury in the sample of 3.The findings include:R1's EMR (Electronic Medical Record) showed R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting the right dominant side, epilepsy, asthma, aphasia, and cellulitis of right lower limb. R1's MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated October 9, 2025, showed R1 was cognitively intact. The MDS continued to show R1 required substantial/maximal assistance from facility staff for toileting hygiene and toilet transfers. R1's ADL (Activity of Daily Living) care plan dated October 5, 2023, showed, [R1] has a deficit in ADL self-care related to disease processes of hemiplegia and hemiparesis…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a comfortable environment. This applies to 2 of 3 (R15 and R29) residents reviewed for environment in a sample of 23.The findings include:1. R15's MDS (Minimum Data Sheet) dated 12/08/2025 said she was cognitively intact. On 1/13/2026 at 10 AM, R15 was in her room wearing a shawl (clothing wrap) covering her upper body. R15 said she was upset because she was cold. R15 said the room's heating unit had not been working since 1/10/2026. R15's room felt cool, and the unit was unplugged. R15 said she reported it to the staff on duty on 1/10/2026, and V11 (Maintenance Assistant) came to assess it on 1/12/2026. R15 said the unit could not be fixed and no one had returned to reassess it. R15 said she was concerned because the weather was expected to get colder. R15's progress note dated 1/13/2026 (during the survey) said R15 was moved to another room due to the current room's heater not functioning properly. 2. R29's (R15's roommate) MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-16 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a dependent resident received timely incontinence cares.This applies to 1 of 5 residents (R67) reviewed for activities of daily living.The findings include:On 1/13/2026 at 10:10 AM, R67 was in bed wearing a gown. R67 was severely confused and fidgeting in her bed. There was a strong foul urine smell in R67's room. R67 had incontinence products on the bedside table. On 1/13/2026 at 11 AM, R67 was still in bed. There was still a strong foul urine smell. V14 (Registered Nurse/RN) said it was difficult to provide incontinence care to R67 because she had the tendency to resist due to her severe dementia. V14 assessed R67's incontinence brief and said it was soiled with urine, and there was a strong foul odor. R67 had two cloth pads underneath her, and the top pad was soiled with a dark yellow stain. V14 said the pad's urine stain was dry. V14 said he was unsure when R67 was last provided with incontinence care.On 1/13/2026 at 11:20 AM, V12 (Certified Nurse Assistant/CNA) and V13 (CNA) said they were going…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician orders for fluid management. This applies to 3 of 4 (R15, R29, R34) residents reviewed for nursing care services in a sample of 23.The findings include:1. On 1/14/2026 at 2 PM, R15 was in bed. R15's bilateral lower extremities were swollen with non-pitting edema. R15 said she had CHF (congestive heart failure), which caused her lower extremities to swell with fluid. R15 said her cardiologist was managing her condition and adjusted her diuretic as needed. R15 continued to say the nursing staff was to obtain her weight daily but recently it had not been done and was unsure why.On 1/16/2026 at 9:40 AM, V15 (RN) said R15's CHF management required her to be on a fluid restriction and for the nursing staff to monitor her weight daily as ordered. V15 said R15's weight had to be monitored closely to ensure she did not go into fluid overload. V15 said if a weight gain was identified, R15's cardiologist had to be notified and may require an adjustment of her diuretic medication or fluid…
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 · Ddisputed · IDR2026-01-10 · tag F0563 — failed to protect the right to visitors — isolatedHonor the resident's right to receive visitors of his or her choosing, at the time of his or her choosing.
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 allowed family visitors for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for resident rights regarding visitation in the sample of 6.The findings include:R1's admission record shows he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including Parkinson's disease and unspecified dementia. R1's annual resident assessment and care screening of 10/7/25 documents R1 has moderate cognitive impairment.On 1/10/26 at 9:40 AM, R1 said he has a blended family, he has 3 daughters, and his wife has a son and a daughter. R1 said there has been a lot of internal conflict. R1 said he has no problems with his daughters coming to visit with him. R1 said his stepson (V7) is his Power of Attorney (POA). R1 said V7 does not get along with his daughters and has blocked them from the phones and blocked them from visiting. R1 said there should not be any restrictions to any of his children visiting. 1/9/26 at 1:40 PM, V6 (R1's daughter)…
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 before2024-11-14 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assist residents identified as needing assistance with eating, personal hygiene and grooming. This applies to 4 of 5 residents (R16, R42, R50 and R51) reviewed for ADL (activities of daily living) in the sample of 15. The findings include: 1. R50 had multiple diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of the stomach, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, cerebral infarction and Barret's esophagus with low grade dysplasia, based on the face sheet. R50's significant change in status MDS (minimum data set) dated September 3, 2024 showed the resident was cognitively intact. The same MDS showed R50 required assistance from the staff with eating and personal hygiene. R50's active order summary report showed on August 27, 2024, the resident was admitted to hospice care due to malignant carcinoid tumor of the stomach. On November 12, 2024 at 10:40 AM, R50 was sitting in his wheelchair inside the main dining room. R50 had accumulation of long facial…
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 · E2024-11-14 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to puree the maple glazed ham to pureed consistency for residents on pureed diets. This applies to 8 of 8 residents (R2, R3, R9, R23, R26, R45, R47, R159) reviewed for mechanically altered diets in the sample of 15. The findings include: On November 13, 2024 at around 10:50 AM, the pureed meal preparation of maple glazed baked ham done by V9 (Cook) was observed in the facility kitchen. V9 stated that she is preparing for 8 residents who are on pureed diets. The maple glazed baked ham was pre-sliced and still had the rind intact. V9 placed the sliced ham into the blender and added about a cup of [NAME] to the blender and pureed the mixture for about two minutes. V9 stated that she is adding the glaze for the flavor. V9 was seen opening the blender and testing the product during the process and then continued to puree the mixture. V9 then opened the lid and after tasting it. V9 stated that it was ready for service. The pureed product had small…
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 · D2024-11-14 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with hearing aid placement for a resident who required assistance. This applies to 1 of 1 resident (R31) reviewed for assistance with hearing aids in the sample of 15. The findings include: R31's electronic medical record showed her to be a [AGE] year old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses that include Carpal Tunnel Syndrome of the right upper limb, Torticollis, Neuropathy, Poly-osteoarthritis, Pain in the right wrist, Weakness, and Need for assistance with personal care. R31's Activities of daily living (ADL) care plan dated December 9, 2023 showed the following [R31] has a deficit in ADL self-care performance related to Chronic Pain, Osteoarthritis, Bilateral artificial knee joints, difficulty in walking, need for assistance with personal care, weakness, poly-osteoarthritis, and Torticollis. [R31] requires the following assistance with ADLs: Upper body dressing: Partial/moderate…
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 · D2024-11-14 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to assess and provide splint to a resident, to prevent further reduction in ROM (range of motion). This applies to 1 of 1 resident (R38) reviewed for range of motion in the sample of 15. The findings include: R38 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R38 had multiple diagnoses including spastic hemiplegia affecting left dominant side, mild dementia with other behavioral disturbance and contracture of left hand muscle, based on the face sheet. R38's significant change in status MDS (minimum data set) dated November 1, 2024 showed the resident was moderately impaired with cognition. The MDS showed R38 had functional limitation in ROM on one side of both upper and lower extremities. The same MDS showed R38 required maximum to total assistance from the staff with most of her ADLs. On November 12, 2024 at 10:11 AM, R38 was sitting in her wheelchair outside of her room. R38 had left arm and hand weakness. R38 was not able to move her left hand…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-01-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly label, date, seal, and store food items in the kitchen. This applies to all residents that receive oral nutrition and foods prepared in the facility kitchen. Findings include: The facility's Long-Term Care Facility Application for Medicare and Medicaid (Form CMS-Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-671) dated 1/23/24 documents the total census was 64 residents. On 1/23/24 at 11:06 AM, V12 (Dietary Manager) 63 residents eat from the facility kitchen. On 1/23/24 starting at 10:13 AM, the facility kitchen was toured in the presence of V12 (Dietary Manager) and V13 (Dietary Manager-in-Training). The following was found: Walk-in refrigerator: 1. Two large bins of pre-cooked roast beef in silver bins, one tray stacked on top of the other, dated 1/22/24. Both trays had tin foil on the top and was not sealed. The foil was broken with meat exposed in both containers. Drips of brown liquid were present on the tinfoil of the bottom tray. 2. Ten trays of fruits in small pre-portioned bowls. V13 said they…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-01-26 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have a designated certified Infection Preventionist (IP) who was responsible for the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP). This affects all 64 residents in the facility. Findings include: The facility's Long-Term Care Facility Application for Medicare and Medicaid (Form CMS-Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-671) dated 1/23/24 documents the total census was 64 residents. On 01/24/24 at 12:10 PM, V2 DON (Director of Nurses) said the facility no longer has an IP. V2 said she believed that the IP quit around the end of September 2023 and the facility has not hired anyone to fill the position since. V2 said she does some of the ICPC along with the facility's nurse consultant. V2 said she is not certified as an IP. On 01/25/24 at 09:42 AM, V19 (Nurse Consultant) said she did the screening, education, and offering of the flu and /covid-19 for the staff at the facility but she was not certified as an IP. The facility's Infection Preventionist policy (date 11/14/22) showed the facility will employ one…
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.
Show the remaining 9 citations
- Potential for harm · F2024-01-26 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespreadKeep all essential equipment working 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 maintain kitchen equipment in safe operating condition. This applies to all residents residing in the facility, and all staff and visitors that come to the facility. The findings include: The facility's Long-Term Care Facility Application for Medicare and Medicaid (Form CMS-Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-671) dated 1/23/24 documents that the total census was 64 residents. On 1/23/24 at 10:59 AM, the hotbox electrical cord in the kitchen was observed frayed/damaged at both ends with wires exposed. The end of the cord that attached to the electrical plug was frayed, and the end of the cord that attached to the hot box was also frayed, exposing wires underneath at both ends. V12 (Dietary Manager) said she put in a work order about a month ago to V14 (Maintenance Director) to replace the hot box cord. On 1/24/24 at 10:36 AM, V14 (Maintenance Director) said the work order to replace the hotbox cord was never put in writing so he did not know when he was first told by V12 (Dietary Manager) that it…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-01-26 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 lint was removed from the facility's dryers, posing a fire hazard. This applies to all residents residing in the facility, all staff, and visitors that come to the facility. The findings include: On 01/24/24 at 10:26 AM, all four clothes dryers were observed with clothes in them and with lint on the screens, from about an eighth to a half inch thick. Each dryer had a front panel at the bottom of the dryer, and when removed, two piles of lint were noted inside each dryer. The sizes of the piles all ranged from six to eighteen inches across, four to six inches high, and three to six inches deep. V20 (Director of Housekeeping) said all the dryers were fire hazards because of the lint in them. V20 said the dryers are to be cleaned every two hours and he believed they had not been cleaned that day at all. The facility lint trap log showed that the lint traps had not been cleaned for the last two days, 1/23/24 and 1/24/24. The lint trap log starts at 6 AM and runs through 6 AM. As of 1/24/24 at 10:26 AM, the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-26 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain residents' dignity while transporting a resident to the shower room and while feeding residents. This applies to 5 of 5 residents (R33, R43, R54, R56 and R115) reviewed for resident rights in a sample of 25. The findings include: 1. On 1/23/24 at 9:16 AM, while signing in at the facility in the open reception area, V5 (CNA/Certified Nurse Aide) was heard yelling down the hallway saying, coming through, coming through. At the same time, V5 CNA and V6 CNA were observed pushing R115 in the shower chair from one hallway to the shower room in another hallway. R115's buttocks were exposed in the shower chair. The nursing station is opposite the shower room and there were about 10 residents in the hallway along with two staff at the nurse's station and the receptionist by the entrance. On 1/23/24 at 11:41 AM, V5 CNA said R115 had a large bowel movement in his room, and they had to give him a shower. V5 said they should not have transported R115 in the shower chair and they should have used a blanket to cover…
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 · E2024-01-26 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to appropriately store and secure medications safely for 4 residents (R13, R19, R61, & R315) in a sample of 25. Findings include: 1. On 01/24/24 at 1:30 PM, R315's oxycodone 5mg medication punch card was observed with the #7 pill slot punched open and a pill inside. V15 (Nurse), who was said she did not know the facility's policy for when a control medication is punched open, but she would not discard the medication because it didn't hit the floor and if she were to discard the medication, she would have to get a second nurse and they may not be available. R315's EHR (Electronic Health Record) showed that she is a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including unilateral primary osteoarthritis of right knee. R315's physician's order dated 1/12/24 showed oxycodone HCl Oral Tablet 5 MG Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed for moderate-severe pain rated 4-6 2. On 01/24/24 at 1:30 PM, R19'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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-26 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's code status was consistent throughout the medical record to accurately reflect a resident's end of life choice. This applies to 1 of 25 residents (R9) reviewed for advanced directives in a sample of 25. Findings include: R9's Face Sheet showed diagnoses of chronic atrial fibrillation, diabetes, hypertension, and history of venous thrombosis and embolism (blood clot). R9's MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated [DATE] shows R9 is cognitively intact. R9's advance directive care plan (initiated [DATE]) showed Pursuant to resident rights and the individual's desire to retain control and autonomy over their health care decisions, [R9] has executed/completed . POLST: Practitioner Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment. The Goal in the care plan (initiated [DATE]) showed [R9's] wishes for DNR status, as specified in their advance directive documents, will be honored and clearly delineated in the medical record, in compliance with state law.…
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 · D2024-01-26 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a resident's pressure ulcer intervention in a timely manner. This applies to 1 of 7 residents (R53) reviewed for pressure ulcer in a sample of 25. The findings include: On 1/23/24 at 11:20 AM, R53 was in bed resting. No low air-loss mattress was present. On 1/24/24 at 11:45 AM, V3 (ADON/Assistant Director of Nursing) performed wound care treatments to R53's bilateral buttocks. V3 said that R53 had bilateral DTI (deep tissue injuries) to her buttocks. V3 stated wound rounds are done weekly with the nurse practitioner and R53's wounds were measured on Monday, 1/22/24. V3 stated R53's DTI had purplish discoloration, there was no drainage, and she had a skin tear to her left buttock. On 1/24/24 at 11:45 AM, no low-air loss mattress was present on R53's bed. On 1/25/24 at 12:42 PM, R53 was in her room eating her lunch. No low air-loss mattress was present. R53's EMR (Electronic Medical Records) showed diagnoses of cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting…
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 · D2024-01-26 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed follow up and document pharmacist recommendations made during the monthly medication review. This applies to 3 of 5 residents (R4, R12 and R26) reviewed for unnecessary medications in a sample of 25 residents. Findings include: 1. R4's medical history includes Chronic Pulmonary Obstructive Disease, Dementia, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Major Depressive disorder, and Hypertension. R4's progress notes from the pharmacist were reviewed for the prior twelve months. On 2/27/23, 3/20/23, 8/30/23 and 11/30/23 the pharmacist documented in the EMR (Electronic Medical Record). MMR (Monthly Mediation Review) completed: irregularity noted. See Consultant's report. No details regarding the irregularity were found in the R4's EMR. The facility did not provide any copies of the consultant reports or physician response to recommendations. 2. R12's medical history includes Chronic Respiratory failure, Dementia, Bipolar Disorder, Recurrent Depressive Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Chronic Pain and History of falling. R12's progress…
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 · D2024-01-26 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
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 thickened liquids as ordered by the Physician for a resident with aspiration precautions. This applies to 1 of 6 residents (R267) reviewed for diet texture in a sample of 25. The findings include: The EMR (Electronic Medical Record) showed R267 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses which included cerebrovascular disease affecting the right dominant side and with right oropharyngeal dysphagia, pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and asthma. R267's 1/22/2024 Minimum Data Set showed he was cognitively intact. R267's risk for altered nutritional status care plan dated 1/17/2024 showed multiple interventions including, Observed for document report PRN any s/sx of dysphagia: Pocketing, Choking, Coughing, Drooling, holding food in mouth, several attempts at swallowing, Refusing to eat, Appears concentered during meals .Provide, serve diet as ordered. R267's Order Summary Report showed a 1/18/2024…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-22 · 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 follow their policy to transfer a resident according to the resident's care plan. This applies to 1 of 3 residents reviewed for improper nursing care in the sample of 5. The findings include: R1's EMR (Electronic Medical Record) showed R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, heart failure, dementia, anxiety, and falls. R1 was discharged from the facility on November 11, 2023. R1's MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated August 10, 2023, showed R1 had severe cognitive impairment. R1 required extensive assistance from two facility staff for transfers between surfaces. R1's ADL (Activity of Daily Living) care plan dated September 28, 2019, showed, [R1] requires extensive to total assist with ADL, non-ambulatory requiring total staff assist with transfers with [mechanical lift]. Has diagnosis of Parkinson's and dementia receiving hospice care. Potential for ROM (Range of Motion) decline due to immobility and…
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.
“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.
- 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
$2,117 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $2,117 — penalty dated 2023-08-21
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIAMOND, ABRAHAM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 17% | since 01/06/2025 |
| DIAMOND, RACHEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 17% | since 01/06/2025 |
| KAHN, MOSHE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | 17% | since 01/06/2025 |
| KAHN, SHOSHANA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 17% | since 01/06/2025 |
| SELESKI, MIRIAM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 17% | since 01/06/2025 |
| SELESKI, SAMUEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 17% | since 01/06/2025 |
| AHLGREN, SUSAN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2020 |
| BRANSHAW, PHILIP | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/06/2025 |
| CLEMONS, CHIQUITA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 02/14/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 $447K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in IL
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 146170. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-16, 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.