West Suburban Medical Ctr
3 Erie Court, Oak Park, IL 60302 · For profit - Corporation · 50 certified beds · (708) 763-6018 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)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- it did not file the payroll staffing data CMS requires — its 1 of 5 staffing rating is the rating CMS assigns for not reporting, not a measure of how many nurses are on the floor
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) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 fell from 5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 76.2% | 63.1% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.4% | 26.1% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 0.0% | 13.9% | 12.0% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
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.
80.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 209 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 61.9% 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 63 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.
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 | 80.0%CMS range 70.5–85.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.9%CMS range 7.6–12.4 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 61.9% | 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 | 65.1% | 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 | 57.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 95.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 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 | 6.0%CMS range 3.2–10.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.74 | 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
No payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours are on file for this home — and the record suggests that is because it did not report them. CMS rates its staffing 1 of 5, which is the rating CMS assigns when a home does not report. Every Medicare-certified nursing home is required to submit its actual payroll data quarterly, and that submission is what makes staffing numbers auditable rather than a claim. A home that does not file is not the same as a home with no data yet: ask this home directly what its nurse-to-resident ratios and weekend RN coverage are, why its payroll data is not filed, and weigh the independent health-inspection score heavily in the meantime.
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.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · G2026-04-02 · tag F0627 — isolatedEnsure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide written notice of transfer/discharge to the resident and/or resident representative, including the reason, effective date, and location of transfer, for one of eight residents reviewed for discharge (R2).This failure resulted in R2, who has aphasia and resided on the same unit for over six years, being transferred to a local hospital emergency room without prior notification or opportunity for preparation.This deficient practice has the potential to cause R2 to experience fear, anxiety, and confusion related to unexpected transfer.Findings includeR2's face sheet documents an admission date 3/25/24. Under insurance it documents self-pay. No contacts listed. R2 previous face sheet documents admission date of 10/23/2020. R2's physician certification documents an admit date of 12/4/19.Requested facility census or initial admission date and facility was not able to provide.R2's Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documents R2 is…
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 · F2026-04-02 · tag F0845 — widespreadSubmit a timely, acceptable plan for facility closure, including notification of the appropriate entities and ensuring residents are transferred in a safe and orderly manner.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an adequate plan for relocation and failed to provide written notification at least 60 days prior to closure to residents, resident representatives, and appropriate parties for eight of eight residents reviewed for facility closure (R1-R8).The facility closed abruptly without an approved closure plan or required notifications, resulting in uncoordinated and unsafe resident discharges.This deficient practice placed residents at risk for unsafe transfers, lack of continuity of care, and increased emotional distress. Findings include:On 3/31/26 at 2:41PM, V6 (President) said they notified the State Agency on Wednesday (3/25/26) via email that they will need to close the facility by Friday (3/27/26) due to financial concerns. V6 said they did not notify resident or representatives with any written documentation. V6 said they were updating State Agency daily on the discharge status of all residents throughout the week. V6 said case management verbally informed all residents at the facility. On 4/2/26 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-10 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that it was safe for one resident (R3) to self-administer medications and did not follow doctors order and facility policy prior to leaving inhaler medication at bedside. This failure affected one resident in a total sample of 15 residents. Findings include: R3 is a [AGE] year-old resident admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including but not limited to Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Order dated 09/24/2024 documents: please assess patient for appropriateness of medications at bedside, if appropriate allow designated medications at bedside. Per protocol. Order dated 09/24/2024 documents: fluticasone-vilanterol 100mcg-25mcg/inhaler inhalation powder. Inhale 1 powder inhalation daily. Care plan dated 09/24/2024 documents: Deficient knowledge: medication related to cognitive impairment or lack of information for oral medications. Resident/Caregiver/support system self-administration assessment tool subacute…
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 · D2024-10-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan and interventions that meet the needs of a resident receiving dialysis treatment. This deficiency affects one (R65) of one resident in a sample of 15 reviewed for dialysis. Findings include: R65 is a [AGE] year old, female, admitted in the unit on 09/27/24, with diagnosis of End Stage Renal Disease. R65 goes to an outpatient dialysis center for hemodialysis three times a week. On 10/08/24 at 2:40 PM, R65 was observed in her room, sitting in bedside chair. R65 is alert, oriented, and verbal. R65 was asked regarding dialysis treatment. R65 replied, I go to dialysis Monday-Wednesday-Friday around 1-2 PM, for 3 and a half hours treatment. I go to outpatient dialysis center. R65's care plan read: Impaired fluid balance related to renal disease: Resident to go to Outpatient dialysis after scheduled therapy Hemodialysis - Monday, Wednesday, Friday schedule; fluid restriction. There were no other specific interventions…
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 · D2024-10-10 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow its policy related to ensuring flowsheets and dialysis communication forms are placed in chart on a resident on dialysis treatment. This deficiency affects one (R65) of one resident in a sample of 15 reviewed for dialysis. Findings include: R65 is a [AGE] year-old, female, admitted in the skilled unit on 09/27/2,4 with diagnosis of End Stage Renal Disease. R65 goes to an outpatient dialysis center for hemodialysis three times a week. On 10/08/24 at 2:40 PM, R65 was observed in her room, sitting in bedside chair. R65 is alert, oriented, and verbal. R65 was asked regarding dialysis treatment. R65 replied, I go to dialysis Monday-Wednesday-Friday around 1-2 PM, for 3 and a half hours treatment. I go to outpatient dialysis center. No, I don't bring anything to the dialysis center. I leave here without anything and back here without anything. No forms or papers that I need to bring to or bring back from. On 10/08/24 at 1:10 PM, V2…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow infection control policies regarding 1. hand hygiene while passing meal trays 2. Droplet Plus isolation precautions, and 3. Legionella (water contamination) prevention; and failed to have a policy which includes COVID prevention. These failures have the potential to affect all seven residents residing on the subacute rehabilitation unit. Findings include: 1. On 9/25/23 and 9/26/23, lunch was observed on the unit. Dietary staff were observed passing meals to residents in their rooms, and no hand hygiene was observed at any time during this process. While passing trays, items were manipulated on several resident's bedside tables in order to make room for the meals. Facility Hand Hygiene states; If hands are not visibly soiled, use an alcohol based hand-rub (ABHR) or wash hands with soap and water for routine decontamination in the following clinical situations: 1.5 After contact with inanimate objects (including medical equipment) in the immediate vicinity of the patient. On 9/27/23 at 1:30PM, V5, Chief…
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 before2023-09-28 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain professional nursing standards of practice by not properly performing double nurse medication verification, in accordance with facility protocol, while administering cancer related medication and by preparing medications in advance of administering them. These failures applied to two (R6, R171) of eight residents reviewed for medication administration. Findings include: 1. On 9/27/23 at 9:45AM, V18, RN (Registered Nurse), was observed administering anastrozole 1 milligram tablet to R6. Upon signing the medication in the mobile scanner, R18 said the scanner prompted that a second nurse verification was needed to complete the administration, because the medication was a cancer related drug. V18 was followed on the unit until the other nurse on duty (V17) was located. V17 and V18 stood at the nurse's station and verified the medication in the mobile scanner. Shortly after this interaction, at 10:30AM, V17, RN, was interviewed about the facility's procedure requiring two nurse verification and said, The verification…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag 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 follow their policy and procedures for providing assistance with activities of daily living by not ensuring resident nails were clean and cut, not ensuring a dependent resident's environment was clean and that he was was free of body odors, and failed to ensure a resident was raised out of bed for daily activities. These failures applied to five of five residents (R6, R7, R9, R18, and R68) reviewed for activities of daily living. Findings include: 1. On 09/26/23 at 11:27 AM, R6 stated her physician told her the podiatrist comes to the facility every 10 days. R6 stated she wanted her toenails cut. R6 had long unclean fingernails. R6 stated no one offered to cut her nails. R6's current subacute rehabilitation conference sheet documents she is dependent on and requires assistance with activities of daily living. 2. On 09/25/23 at 1:11 AM, R7 had a sock on his left hand, right hand was heavily contracted, his toe nails were long, thick, and yellow, R7 had a strong body odor, and R7's skin was red on his right…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag 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 fall prevention policy and procedures by not ensuring a chair alarm intervention was in place as required for a resident at risk for falls resulting in an unwitnessed fall. This failure applied to one of one resident (R9) reviewed for accidents/falls. Findings include: R9 is an [AGE] year-old female with a diagnosis history of Partial Paralysis due to Stroke, who was admitted to the facility 09/08/2023. On 09/25/23 at 1:28 PM, R9 was sitting in her room in her wheelchair. V15 (Family) was visiting R9. V15 stated R9 had a fall last Tuesday or so, at around 3PM. V15 stated the facility has known R9 is a fall risk since she was admitted and has provided her with a chair alarm since her admission. V15 stated during the incident, R9 was sleep in her chair. V15 stated R9 moves around a lot because in her mind she can still move. V15 stated R9 fell on her bottom. R9's physician progress note, dated 09/19/2023, documents per V15 (Family Member),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have a five percent (5%) or lower medication error rate. There were six medication errors out of 25 medication opportunities, resulting in a 24% medication error rate. This failure affected two of five residents observed during medication administration. Findings include: On 09/26/23 at 12:25PM, V7, RN (Registered Nurse), was observed for insulin administration for R9. V7 said the blood glucose was taken around 11:30AM, prior to lunch. V7 could not provide the exact blood glucose result, but said according to the result, R9 should have gotten some insulin according to a sliding scale as ordered by the Physician. V7 said before insulin was given to R9, she needed to be monitored for how much food was eaten. Later at 12:45PM, V7 said since R9 only ate 25% of her meal, she would be withholding the insulin, and this did not require notification of any provider, because she knows the blood sugar will decrease if given. According to results review in the electronic health record, blood glucose was not documented as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 vaccine policy and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccination by not ensuring a vaccine eligible long term care resident was offered and educated on or receiving a flu or pneumonia vaccination. This failure applied to one (R7) of five residents reviewed for vaccinations. Findings include: R7 is a [AGE] year-old male, with a diagnoses history of Coronary Vascular Accident, Aphasia, Seizures, and Depression who has been residing at the facility for the past 5 years per nursing. On 09/27/23 at 12:40 PM, V16 (Infection Preventionist) stated she began working on the unit as the Infection Preventionist at the end of July, and has been working in that role a little over 2 months. V16 stated it wasn't documented R7 received any flu vaccines. V16 stated she educates the nurses on vaccines, and they handle ensuring residents are offered and educated on vaccines. V16 stated if the patient wants the vaccines, they would sign a consent, or if 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 · D2023-09-28 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 reviews, the facility failed to follow their COVID-19 policy and procedures for COVID vaccination, by not ensuring a vaccine eligible long term care resident was offered and educated on or received a COVID vaccination. This failure applied to one (R7) of five residents reviewed for COVID vaccination. Findings include: R7 is a [AGE] year-old male with a diagnoses history of Coronary Vascular Accident, Aphasia, Seizures, and Depression, who has been residing at the facility for the past 5 years, per nursing. On 09/27/23 at 12:40 PM, V16 (Infection Preventionist) stated she began working on the unit as the Infection Preventionist at the end of July, and has been working in that role a little over 2 months. V16 stated R7 received a COVID 19 vaccine 03/16/2021, which is likely an initial dose, based on when the vaccines became available in December 2020. V16 stated she is unable to find any other COVID vaccine information for R7. V16 stated the facility does not have a COVID policy. V16…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-08-25 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — widespreadEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have an active order for oxygen administration for one resident (R9) prior to administration; failed to follow facility policy and accepted standards of care related to medication administration by not pulling residents' medications at the time of administration; and failed to safely secure controlled class drug medications. These failures apply to nine of nine (R8, R9, R10, R11, R109, R158, R159, R161, R209) residents reviewed for medication administration and storage, and has the potential to affect all 22 residents currently on the unit. Findings include: On 08/23/2022 at 10:03am, observed a closed binder laid on top of V3's (Registered Nurse) mobile nursing cart. V3 (Registered Nurse) took a small cup of packaged medications from the top of her mobile cart, walked away from cart, and headed down the opposite end of hallway. Mobile cart with binder on top of cart was left unsecured, plugged into an outlet near opposite end of hallway, and not under constant surveillance by V3. At 10:07am, V3 (Registered…
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 · E2022-08-25 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policy to ensure residents had Advanced Directives in place. This failure applied to six (R6, R7, R108, R109, R110, and R159) of six residents reviewed for advanced directives. Findings include: R159's record review indicated no Advanced Directive in place. Noted resident to have an admission date of 08/19/2022. R7's record review indicated no Advanced Directive in place. Noted resident to have an admission date of 10/23/2020. On 08/23/22 at 2:17pm, the facility provided no documentation showing R6 was given a copy of the state law on Advanced Directives, or has Advanced Directives in place. On 08/23/22 at 2:17pm, the facility provided documentation R108 was given a copy of the state law on Advanced Directives in 08/2022. Did not provide documentation showing R108 has Advanced Directives in place. On 08/23/22 at 2:17pm, the facility provided no documentation showing R109 was given a copy of the state law on Advanced Directives, or has Advanced Directives in place. On 08/23/22 at 2:17pm, the facility provided…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| AUM GLOBAL HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 12/03/2022 |
| GREENBERG, MICHELE | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/03/2022 |
| PATLOLA, RATHNAKER | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/03/2022 |
| PRASAD, MANOJ | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/03/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
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 145743. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-10, 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.