Taylorville Skld Nur & Rehab
800 McAdam Dr, Taylorville, IL 62568 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 96 certified beds · (217) 824-2277 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- the CMS record shows $5,269 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-12)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 8.6% | 13.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.9% | 6.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.6% | 0.9% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.1% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 55.9% | 54.2% | 6.5% | typical for the 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 | 2.2% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 14.4% | 14.3% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.4% | 18.3% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.2% | 91.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.3% | 4.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.8% | 20.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 13.6% | 21.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.9% | 2.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 74.4% | 63.1% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.7% | 26.1% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.0% | 13.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.53 | 2.02 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.24 | 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.
42.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 75 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 25.0% 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 52 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 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 41% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% 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 14% — 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 | 42.4%CMS range 31.7–55.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.8%CMS range 7.7–15.8 | 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 | 25.0% | 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 | 19.2% | 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 | 32.7% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 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 | 2.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.8%CMS range 4.7–12.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.17 | 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 96 beds and averages 81.3 residents a day — about 85% 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 3.42 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.27 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 2.81 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.35 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · F2026-06-04 · tag F0924 — widespreadPut firmly secured handrails on each side of hallways.
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 and interview the facility failed to secure handrails to the wall in a safe and secure manner. This deficiency has the potential to affect all 79 residents/visitors and employees in the facility by compromising their safety when grabbing ahold of the handrails. Findings Include:On 06/01/2026 at 9:45 AM the handrail between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] was loose and moved easily.On 06/03/2026 at 10:00 AM the handrail between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] was loose and moved easily, at 10:03 AM the handrail outside of room eight was loose and moved easily, at 10:06 AM the handrail outside of room [ROOM NUMBER] was loose and moved easily, at 10:07 AM the handrail outside of room [ROOM NUMBER] was loose and moved easily and at 10:09 AM the handrail outside of room [ROOM NUMBER] was loose and moved easily.On 06/03/2026 at 1:55 PM V11, Maintenance Director, confirmed that the handrails were loose and easily moveable between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS], between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS], outside of room eight, outside of room…
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 · E2026-06-04 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a homelike environment by failing to repair a damaged wall for five of five residents (R7, R11, R12, R17, R75) reviewed for homelike environment in the sample list of 40.Findings include:On 06/01/2026 at 09:30 AM, R75's exterior wall, lower six inches, was not painted, plaster was crumbling and missing in spots where the wall and floor intersect and there was no base board trim in place.On 06/01/2026 at 09:33 AM, R12's exterior wall, lower six inches, was not painted, plaster was crumbling and missing in spots where the wall and floor intersect and there was no base board trim in place.On 06/01/2026 at 09:35 AM, R11's exterior wall, lower six inches, was not painted, plaster was crumbling and missing in spots where the wall and floor intersect and there was no base board trim in place.On 06/01/2026 at 09:40 AM, R7's exterior wall, lower six inches, was not painted, plaster was crumbling and missing in spots where the wall and floor intersect and there was no base board trim in place.On 06/01/2026 at 09:42 AM, R17'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 · E2026-06-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate electrical outlets in resident rooms for three of three residents (R14, R76, R8) reviewed for accident hazards in the sample list of 40.Findings Include:On 06/03/2026 at 12:27 PM R14's room contained two power strips were being used. One power strip was plugged into a two-receptacle outlet with three devices plugged into it. The other power strip was plugged into a two-receptacle outlet with three devices plugged into it.On 06/03/2026 at 12:32 PM R76's room contained a multi-port that was plugged into a two-receptacle outlet. Two devices and one two wire extension cord were plugged into the multi-port.On 06/03/2026 at 12:32 PM R8's room contained a power strip that was plugged into a two-receptacle outlet. Two devices were plugged into the power strip.On 06/03/2026 at 11:30 AM V11, maintenance director, confirmed there were multiple rooms, including R14, R76 and R8's rooms, with multiple multi-plug power strips in use. V11 also confirmed there were multiple rooms with two wire extension cords connecting…
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 · D2026-06-04 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide dignified dining services while maintaining resident's rights for three of three (R20, R35 and R50) residents reviewed for dining meal service in the sample list of 40.Findings include:1. R20's Care Plan dated 6/3/2026 documents R20 has a diagnosis of Dementia. This Care Plan also documents an admission date of 01/03/2025.R20's Care plan dated 3/12/2026 documents to provide feeding/dining assistance as needed.R20's Care plan dated 3/12/2026 documents R2 has impaired cognitive function related to the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score and dementia.R20's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents R20 has severe cognitive impairment.R35's Care Plan dated 6/3/2026 documents R35 has a diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease. This Care plan also documents an admission date of 02/01/2025.R35's Care Plan dated 2/5/2026 documents R35 has impaired cognitive function/Dementia or impaired thought processes related to Alzheimer's.R35'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 · D2026-06-04 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate positioning during enteral feeding and failed to ensure the enteral feeding bottle was labeled with all of the required information for two of two (R1 and R85) residents reviewed for enteral feeding in the sample list of 40.Findings include:R85's Care Plan dated 6/2/2026 documents R85's diagnosis of Dysphagia. This Care Plan also documents an admission date of 5/28/2026.R85's Care Plan dated 5/29/2026 documents to administer enteral nutrition per physician orders.R85's physician's order dated 5/28/2026 documents an order for Enteral Feed every shift. Administer Jevity 1.5 via an Enteral Pump and Infuse at 45 ml/hr (milliliters/hour) X (times)24 hrs (hours).R85's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents R85 has moderate cognitive impairment.On 6/1/2026 at 10:04 a.m., R85 was lying supine (flat) in bed with the enteral feeding attached to R85's Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) tube and the feeding was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-04 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
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 place an oxygen in use warning sign at the room entrance door to three of three (R31, R58 and R85) residents reviewed for respiratory care in the sample list of 40.Findings include:1. R31's Care Plan dated 6/3/2026 documents a diagnosis of Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypercapnia, and Dependence on Supplemental Oxygen. This Care plan also documents an admission date of 5/21/2026.R31's Order Summary Report dated 5/21/2026 documents a physician's order for oxygen at two liters per minute via nasal cannula continuously.R31's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents R31 is cognitively intact.On 6/01/2026 8:55 a.m., R31 was lying in bed with oxygen on at two liters via nasal cannula. There was not a no smoking/oxygen in use sign at the room door at this time.On 6/1/2026 at 10:41 a.m., V4 Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) confirmed there was no warning sign at R31's room door. V4 stated there should be a sign at the door warning…
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 before2026-06-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to properly store an inhaler in a safe location for one of one (R40) resident reviewed for medication storage in the sample list of 40.Findings include:R40's Care Plan dated 6/3/2026 documents R40's diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). This Care Plan also documents an admission date of 5/15/2026.R40's Care Plan dated 5/26/2026 documents R40 had impaired cognitive function related to Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of (10 out of 15).R40's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents moderate cognitive impairment.R40's Order Summary Report dated 5/15/2026 documents a physician's order for Trelegy Ellipta Inhalation Aerosol Powder Breath Activated 100-62.5-25 MCG/ACT (micrograms/actuation) (Fluticasone-Umeclidinium-Vilanterol) 1 puff inhale orally one time a day related to COPD.On 6/1/2026 at 9:00 p.m., R40 was sitting on R40's recliner in the room. Trelegy Ellipta Inhalation Aerosol Powder was noted at 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 · D2026-06-04 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was performed during incontinent cares for one (R21) of three residents reviewed for infection control in the sample list of 40. Findings include:R21's electronic medical record documents an admission date of 9/7/2024. R21's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents R21's cognitive skills for daily decision making as severely impaired. R21's MDS dated [DATE] documents R21 is always incontinent and that R21` is totally dependent on caregivers to provide toileting assistance. On 6/2/2026 at 11:45 AM, V10 (Certified Nursing Aid, CNA) entered R21's room to provide perineal care. V10 entered the room with gloves already on and brought two washcloths, a package of disposable wipes, and a disposable incontinence brief with V10 into R21's room. V10 went to the bathroom faucet and turned on the water and placed the two wash clothes in the sink under the running water. V10 then removed R21's pants and tossed them on the floor…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-01-16 · tag F0577 — widespreadAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the Facility failed to ensure the Illinois Department of Public Health deficiencies findings were readily available for review, as well as post signage indicating where the report was located. This failure has the potential to affect all 81 residents residing in the Facility. Findings include: On 1/14/2025 at 10:15 AM, R7, R8, R12 and V23 stated they were unaware where to locate the survey results binder or what the results of the last survey were. R7's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents R7 is cognitively intact. R8's MDS dated [DATE] documents R8 is mildly cognitively impaired. On 1/15/2025 at approximately 11:00 AM, V19, MDS coordinator stated R8's cognition has improved since her last MDS assessment. R12's MDS dated [DATE] documents R12 is cognitively intact. R23's MDS dated [DATE] documents R23 is cognitively intact. On 1/14/2025 at approximately 11:00 AM V22, Medical Records, was asked where the survey results binder was located. V22 opened a…
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 before2025-01-16 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespreadEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the Facility failed to properly store medications and ensure timely disposal of a multi dose vial. This failure has the potential to affect all 81 residents residing in the Facility. Findings include: 1. On 1/13/2025 at 1:34 PM, the North Hall medication storage room was inspected with V20, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). There was a medication refrigerator that contained an open vial of Apilisol (A solution used to adminster TB skin tests) that had an open date of 11/20/2024. The sticker on the vial documented, Discard in use vials after 30 days. On 1/16/2024 at approximately 9:45 AM, V2, Director of Nursing stated V3, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) administers the TB skin tests. On 1/16/2025 at 10:19 AM, V3 verified the Apilisol vial observed in the medication storage room refrigerator was the only vial at the Facility on 1/13/2025 but they had since discarded it and ordered 2 more vials, one for each medication room. The document provided by V2, titled Aplisol- Tuberculin Purified Protein Derivative, Diluted [Stabilized…
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 · E2025-01-16 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 food was served at an appealing temperature for 7 of 24 residents (R7, R23, R32, R38, R66, R73, and R283) reviewed for dietary services in the sample of 36. Findings include: 1. On 1/14/2025 at 10:10 AM, R7 stated she eats her meals in her room and the food is cold 99% of the time. It won't even melt butter. Yesterday I only ate half of my spaghetti. Every bite was gross because it was cold. R7's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents R7 is cognitively intact. 2. On 1/14/2024 at 10:15 AM, R23 stated, Most of the time it's cold (the meals). I usually get cold eggs but I eat them. I just cover them with mayo. R23's MDS dated [DATE] documents R23 is cognitively intact. The Facility's Resident Council Meeting Minutes dated 10/25/2024 documents residents had dietary concerns of the food temperatures and Some residents' food is still cold- on the hall. 3. R66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of, in part,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-16 · 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 provide assistance/cueing for 1 of 3 residents (R11) reviewed for meal assistance in the sample of 36. Finding include: 1. On 1/13/2025 at 12:24PM R11 observed sitting at table in dining room asleep. R11's green beans are in bowl, with a roll in it. R11's spaghetti is in a bowl with a built up handled fork in spaghetti. On 1/13/2025 at 12:32 PM V21, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) asked R11 who was sleeping if R11 was getting enough to eat. R11 had not touched his food. V21 LPN did not cue R11 to eat. On 1/13/2025 at 12:37PM V21, LPN did place R11's drink in front of R11. At 12:40PM R11 observed drinking hot chocolate from cup and pouring it down his shirt. 12:42PM R11 got bowl of spaghetti and holds in left hand while scooping spaghetti with fork and spilling it on clothes. R11 then starts eating spaghetti out of bowl with his hands. At no time does staff provide cueing or assistance to R11. At 1:11 PM V21, LPN asks R11 if wants dinner roll and places in R11's hand. R11 eats 100% of dinner roll. R11 is never…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the Facility failed to prevent hair contamination for 2 of 24 residents (R7, R23) reviewed for Dietary Services, in the sample of 36. Findings include: 1. On 1/14/2025 at 10:10 AM, R7 stated, I found a hair in my mashed potatoes about a month ago. I love mashed potatoes and gravy and I'm trying to gain weight. I didn't finish eating them. I told someone, I don't know who, someone in the kitchen. R7's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documents R7 is cognitively intact. 2. On 1/14/2024 at 10:15 AM R23 stated, I've also had hairs in my food. I felt something in my mouth and there was a hair on my hamburger. It wasn't a short one like mine, it was long. They (Dietary staff) wear hairnets but it still happens occasionally. R23 stated she did not finish eating her hamburger because she lost her appetite. On 1/15/25 at 3:24 PM, V1, Administrator stated she was unaware of complaints of hair in food but she would look into it. The Facility's Safe Food Handling Policy dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-01 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to properly monitor personal food storage for four of four residents (R25, R63, R65, and R17) reviewed for environment in the sample 35. 1. R25's face sheet, dated 1/31/24, documented that R25 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, Osteomyelitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, cardiomyopathy, anxiety disorder, osteoarthritis, and chronic gout. R25's MDS (Minimum Data Set), dated 1/16/24, documented that R25 is severely cognitively impaired. On 1/29/24 at 9:15 AM, R25 was observed resting in bed. R25 had a small refrigerator sitting on his nightstand. The nightstand was within reach of R25. The refrigerator had a thermometer that read 78 degrees. The contents in the refrigerator included a gallon of chocolate milk that was half full and warm to touch, individually wrapped homemade caramels, a jar of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$5,269 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $1,882 — penalty dated 2024-02-12
- $3,387 — penalty dated 2024-01-22
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CREST HEALTHCARE CONSULTING — 11 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 2.3 | +1.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 3.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.3★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| CREST I TBD HOLDCO LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/22/2025 |
| CAPITAL FINANCE LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2022 |
| LICHTMAN, SHALOM | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2019 |
| LIGHT MAN LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/22/2025 |
| CLARK, LACY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/11/2024 |
| GILL, PAVINDERPAL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/15/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 6 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.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
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 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 146048. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-04, 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.