550 South Mulford Avenue, Rockford, IL 61108 · Winnebago County · (815) 484-1002
268 certified beds, about 183 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 145142 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 31, 2025, inspectors cited 8 health deficiencies (the Illinois average is 12.6, the national average 9.2).
Of 46 health citations since August 2023, 5 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $129,985 in the last three years; the largest was $106,052, and the latest is dated April 8, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.39 hours per resident per day, against 3.45 across Illinois and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.62 of those hours.
56.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Illinois average 44.5%).
CMS links it to The Alden Network, an affiliated group of 27 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 46 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to administer the facility by failing to ensure a qualified individual was hired as the social service director. This has the potential to affect all 182 residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to have a qualified full time social service director. This has the potential to affect all 182 residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors for 20 of 23 residents (R1-R20) reviewed for medication errors in the sample of 23. This failure resulted in R1 and R2 experiencing insomnia. This failure resulted in R1 experiencing increased pain and discomfort.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to provide sufficient staff to meet the needs of the residents for 20 of 23 residents (R1-R20) reviewed for staffing in the sample of 23. This failure resulted in R1-R20 not receiving their scheduled evening medications on 3/28/26 due to a lack of a licensed nurse to administer the medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was supervised while taking medications for 1 of 2 residents (R1) reviewed for medication administration in the sample of 14.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to administer medications at the ordered time. There were 25 opportunities with 20 errors resulting in an 80% medication error rate. This failure affects 1 of 2 residents (R1) observed during medication pass.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medications were secure and not left unattended for 1 of 2 residents (R1) observed for medication administration in the sample of 14.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff donned the required personal protection equipment (PPE) when entering a room in which a resident is on contact isolation for 1 of 4 residents (R1) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 14.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received assistance with showers. This applies to 1 of 3 (R2) residents reviewed for activities of daily living in the sample of 4.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure safety interventions were in place for a resident at risk for falls. This applies to 1 of 3 (R2) reviewed for safety in the sample of 4.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a physician or nurse practitioner were notified promptly of radiology results. This applies to 1 of 8 residents (R1) reviewed for mechanical lift transfers in the sample of 8.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the facility was free from abuse to 2 of 3 residents (R2, R1) reviewed for sexual abuse in the sample of 3.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform a resident of of their plan of care. This failure affects one of three residents (R1) reviewed for resident's rights.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure prescribed medications were acquired and provided for 1 of 3 residents (R1) in the sample of 3 reviewed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to administer cardiac medications as prescribed to 1 of 3 residents (R1) with a heart arrhythmia, heart disease, kidney disease, and hypertension in the sample of 3 reviewed for medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure medications were administered timely as ordered and scheduled for 4 of 5 residents (R58, R111, R184, R73) reviewed for medication administration in the sample of 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent potential cross-contamination by failing to don the proper personal protective equipment (PPE) while providing high-contact resident care for residents requiring enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) and failing to remove gloves and perform hand hygiene after providing incontinence care. These failures affect 3 of 5 residents (R77, R160, R99) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain a residents dignity, by failing to dispose of and clean emesis from a basin from the resident's bedside. This applies to 1 of 1 residents (R2) reviewed for dignity in the sample of 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide clearly defined target behaviors and failed to provide an appropriate indication for the use of an antipsychotic medication for two (R34, R55) residents with a diagnosis of Dementia of five residents in the sample of 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide bed rails for assistance with bed mobility for 1 of 2 residents (R99) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's) in the sample of 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure signs and symptoms of nausea and vomiting were treated as ordered and failed to provide wound/skin care as ordered for 2 of 7 residents (R2, R99) reviewed for quality of care in the sample of 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure weights were completed as ordered for residents with weight loss for 2 residents (R95, R3) reviewed for nutrition and weight loss in the sample of 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to administer medications per physicians orders as scheduled. There were 9 medication errors out of 28 opportunities, resulting in a 32.1% medication error rate. This applies to 1 of 2 residents (R58) observed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to implement their Abuse Prevention Policy by failing to immediately remove the accused employee from resident contact for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for Abuse in the sample of 3.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to report to the State Agency in a timely manner an allegation of Physical Abuse for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for Abuse in the sample of 3.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents at risk for falls had their call lights within reach for 3 of 6 residents(R3, R5, R7) reviewed for safety in the sample of 8.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to serve coffee at a temperature to prevent burns. This failure resulted in R1 receiving a 12-inch, slough filled burn to her left thigh. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for safety in the sample of 3. This past compliance occurred from 12/1/2024-12/2/2024.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident remained free from resident-to-resident abuse for two of two residents (R30, R58) reviewed for abuse in the sample of 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff were documenting the resident's Physician, or Nurse Practitioner was notified when a resident's blood glucose levels were out of the parameters ordered by the physician for 1 of 1 resident (R133) reviewed for insulin medication use in the sample of 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure care was provided for a resident's right hand contracture and nails for 1 of 1 residents (R32) reviewed for activities of daily living in the sample of 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's dressings were in place for a resident (R20) with venous stasis ulcers. This applies to 1 of 6 residents reviewed for skin conditions in the sample of 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide services to prevent a resident's Range of Motion from declining. This applies to 1 of 1 resident (R23) reviewed for Range of Motion in a sample of 38 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to safely transfer a resident using a mechanical lift. This applies to one of one residents (R71) reviewed for safety in the sample of 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure there were physicians orders for a suprapubic catheter and it's care. This applies to 1 of 1 resident (R5) reviewed for catheters in a sample of 38 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident with significant weight loss was assisted and encouraged with meals. The facility failed to ensure a residents supplement intake was accurately documented for 1 of 1 residents (R93) reviewed for significant weight loss in the sample of 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to remove contaminated gloves after providing incontinence care and failed to place soiled linen in a plastic bag. This failure applies to two of seven residents (R32 and R74) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 35.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility to ensure a resident's right to be free from neglect for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for neglect in the sample of 5. This failure resulted in R1 lying in urine for hours causing embarrassment and emotional distress.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to identify a declining pressure wound, reassess a declining pressure wound, document changes of a declining pressure wound, and notify the decline to a care provider. This applies to 1 of 5 residents (R1) reviewed for pressure injuries in a sample of 6. These failures resulted in R1's (unstaged) pressure injury declining to a larger unstageable pressure injury, which required R1's hospitalization and extensive surgical debridement of the pressure injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the necessary care and services were provided to one of ten residents (R1) reviewed for quality of care by not monitoring R1's blood glucose levels and by not administering insulin as ordered. This failure contributed to R1 experiencing an elevated blood glucose level which required an admission to the local hospital.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the required personal protective equipment was worn for a resident on contact isolation precautions and failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions were implemented for 4 of 35 (R9, R110, R117, R118) residents reviewed for infection control.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure weights were monitored for a resident with congested heart failure for 1 of 35 residents (R110) in the sample of 35. The Findings Include: R110's face sheet printed on 8/8/23 showed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include but not limited to chronic diastolic congestive heart failure, end stage renal disease, hypertensive heart, and chronic kidney disease with heart failure and with stage 5 chronic kidney disease or end stage renal disease. R110's physicians order sheet (POS) printed on 8/8/23 showed to check weights x4 every shift on Wednesday for screening for 4 weeks. R110's after visit summary dated 7/11/23 showed for your congestive heart failure to check your weight every day. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to safely transfer residents at risk for falls for two of 35 residents (R140, R217) reviewed for safety in the sample of 35.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a urinary drainage bag below the level of the bladder for two of eight residents (R143, R211) reviewed for catheters in the sample of 35.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure pain management for a resident complaining of pain for one of 35 residents (R211) reviewed for pain in the sample of 35.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to honor a resident's food preference. This applies to 1 of 35 residents (R89) reviewed for preferences in the sample of 35.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident was evaluated for occupational and physical therapy needs after returning from a hospital stay. This applies to 1 of 8 residents (R62) reviewed for therapy in the sample of 35.
26 fire safety citations on file: 9 on July 31, 2025, 10 on June 27, 2024, 1 on April 12, 2024, 6 on August 9, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| April 8, 2026 | Fine | $16,705 |
| April 12, 2024 | Fine | $7,228 |
| March 4, 2024 | Fine | $106,052 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Illinois | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.39 | 3.45 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.62 | 0.72 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.01 | 3.07 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.93 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.83 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 56.1% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 58.1% | 41.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 4.72 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.54 on weekdays and 3.01 on weekends, 15% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 2.4% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.38 in April to June 2025 to 3.39 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.39 | 0.62 | 3.54 | 3.01 | 2.4% | 0 of 90 | 183 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.41 | 0.58 | 3.56 | 3.03 | 9.0% | 0 of 92 | 179 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.34 | 0.56 | 3.50 | 2.94 | 16.0% | 0 of 92 | 178 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.38 | 0.56 | 3.56 | 2.93 | 18.8% | 0 of 91 | 178 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Illinois, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.26 | 0.65 | 3.40 | 2.92 | 5.4% | 0.6% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Illinois, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $22.10 | $18.95 to $23.26 | 68,640 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $36.06 | $30.57 to $38.25 | 17,440 |
| Registered nurses | $46.15 | $38.47 to $50.94 | 138,910 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Illinois | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.9 | 13.4 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 2.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.7 | 14.3 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 20.0 | 26.1 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.9 | 13.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.7 | 2.0 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 2.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Alden Debes Rehab & HCC's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (51.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
51.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Illinois: 106 better, 85 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 249 eligible stays.
11.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Illinois: 2 better, 14 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 234 eligible stays.
7.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Illinois: 3 better, 10 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 136 eligible stays.
83.2% this home
Median of homes: Illinois50.0% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 89 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Illinois0.3% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 147 residents counted.
0.6% this home
Median of homes: Illinois1.5% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 147 residents counted.
63.6% this home
Median of homes: Illinois100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 55 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: ALDEN-ALMA NELSON MANOR, INC.. CMS links this home to The Alden Network, a group of 27 nursing homes averaging 2.8 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alden Realty Services, Inc | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 05/08/2000 |
| The Floyd a Schlossberg Living Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 07/01/2013 |
| Midcap Funding IV Trust | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 07/01/2018 | |
| Gates, Joshua | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 03/31/2014 | |
| Carl, Joan | Corporate director | Individual | 05/08/2000 | |
| Schlossberg, Floyd | Corporate director | Individual | 05/08/2000 | |
| Carl, Joan | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/08/2000 | |
| Schlossberg, Floyd | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/08/2000 | |
| Schullo, Randi | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/08/2000 | |
| Alden Management Services, Inc. | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 08/04/2010 | |
| Davis, Esther | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/15/2010 | |
| Molitor, Robert | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/16/2008 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Illinois. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.