1212 South Second Street, Dekalb, IL 60115 · De Kalb County · (815) 758-8151
119 certified beds, about 75 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1974
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 145261 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 17, 2024, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the Illinois average is 12.6, the national average 9.2).
Of 46 health citations since August 2022, 5 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $44,190 in the last three years; the largest was $22,586, and the latest is dated June 23, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.35 hours per resident per day, against 3.45 across Illinois and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.87 of those hours.
65.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Illinois average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Aperion Care, an affiliated group of 33 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure resident meals were provided on time for 10 of 10 residents (R1-R7 and R10-R12) reviewed for resident rights in the sample of 12.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain a clean environment for seven residents. This applies to seven of ten residents (R1-R7) reviewed for environment in the sample of ten.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain the south shower room in a safe, sanitary, functional and comfortable condition for residents. This applies to 51 residents residing on the south wing.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to a resident with a history of falling for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for falls in the sample of 6.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to provide ordered wound care for 2 of 3 residents (R2 and R3) reviewed for nursing care/wound care in the sample of 13.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide ordered medications and failed to administer the correct medication. This applies to 2 of 5 (R5 & R1) reviewed for medications in the sample of 13.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that dietary support staff completed a food handler's training course within thirty days of hire and failed to have a policy in place to ensure dietary staff complete this required training for safe food handling per Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) regulations. This failure affects all 80 residents who currently reside at the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow wound treatment orders for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for wounds in the sample of 3. This failure resulted in R1's wound deteriorating and requiring R1 to be hospitalized and recieve a surgical intervention.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident was not verbally abused by staff. This applies to 1 of 4 (R1) reviewed for abuse in the sample of 4.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to safely reposition a resident in bed for one of three residents (R1) reviewed for safety/supervision in the sample of three. This failure resulted in R1 rolling out of bed onto the floor and experiencing increased pain and a humeral fracture. This past noncompliance occurred from March 11, 2025- March 17, 2025.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to identify a wound prior to becoming an unstageable wound, failed to have pressure ulcer interventions in place, and failed to ensure wound treatment orders were in place for 2 of 3 residents (R1, R2) reviewed for pressure ulcers in the sample of 3. These failures resulted in R1 being at an increased risk of infection and delayed wound healing.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to notify a resident representative of an advanced stage wound for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for notification of changes in the sample of 3.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to identify that a resident who is at risk for developing pressure injuries and who had a pressure injury would be at a higher risk for developing a second pressure injury; and failed to implement preventative measures and adequate skin assessments for 1 of 4 residents (R1) reviewed for wounds in a sample size of 7. This failure resulted in R1 developing two pressure injuries to the back of his ears that were both identified at a stage 3 when found.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to notify the physician of an ongoing change in condition in a timely manner. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for notification of changes in the sample of 5.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to identify and assess a resident for an ongoing change in condition. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for quality of care in the sample of 5.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure medication orders were verified prior to administering medications for 1 of 4 residents (R1) reviewed for pharmacy services in the sample of 8.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their abuse policy by not removing staff from resident care during an abuse investigation for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for abuse in the sample of 6.
Inspectors wrote4. On 7/15/24 at 9:58 AM, R61's bed (hospital bed that raised up and down) and air mattress pump were plugged into a power strip. 5. On 7/15/24 at 10:17 AM, R11 had an air mattress pump hanging on the headboard of the bed. The air mattress pump was plugged into a power strip. 6. On 7/15/24 at 10:03 AM, R53 had an air mattress pump hanging on the headboard of the bed. The air mattress pump was plugged into a power strip. On 7/15/24 at 12:40 PM, V12 (Maintenance Director) said medical equipment should be plugged into wall outlets and not power strips. V12 added power strips are not used because they can be turned off or easily lose power. V12 said medical equipment should be plugged into a wall outlet because a wall outlet provided a more reliable source of electricity. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to prepare and distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This applies to 5 of 5 (R3, R26, R14, R36, R23) residents reviewed for pureed diets in the sample of 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure incontinence care was provided for a resident dependent on staff for cares. This applies to 1 one 18 residents (R18) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADL's) in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide the necessary treatment for a resident's fractured arm. The facility failed to obtain daily weights for a resident with a diagnosis of congestive heart failure. These failures apply to 2 of 18 residents (R34, R18) reviewed for quality of care in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to obtain physician prescribed medication and failed to follow physician orders for eye drops for 2 of 18 residents (R2, R32) reviewed for physician services in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident on a PRN (as needed) antipsychotic medication was evaluated by a physician after 14 days and failed to monitor a resident for antipsychotic side effects by not doing an AIMS (Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale) test every 6 months for 2 of 5 residents (R32, R11) reviewed for psychotropic medications in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to administer physician prescribed medications as ordered. There were 29 opportunities with 3 errors resulting in a 10.34% error rate. This applies to 2 of 4 residents (R2, R12) observed during medication pass.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to explain binding arbitration in a manner the resident understood. This applies 1 of 3 (R68) in the sample of 18 reviewed for arbitration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure staff wore Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for a resident on Contact Isolation and a resident on Enhanced Barrier Precautions for 2 of 18 residents (R6, R16) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a safe transfer for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for safety in the sample of 3.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place for 1 of 3 residents (R2) reviewed for falls in the sample of 8.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide ADL (Activities of Daily Living) assistance for residents' requiring extensive assistance with ADLs for two of three residents (R2, R3) reviewed for ADL assistance in the sample of three.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure multidose insulin pens were labeled with an open date for 4 of 4 (R59, R8, R33, R37) residents reviewed for medication storage in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow their lunch menu by not serving the pureed bread option for four of four residents (R45, R60, R19, R36) reviewed for food menus in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to assist a resident with discharge planning. This applies to 1 of 18 residents (R35) reviewed for discharge planning in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide ADL (activities of daily living) assistance for residents' requiring staff assistance to complete ADLs for 2 of 18 residents (R54, R32) reviewed for activities of daily living in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure interventions to promote healing were in place to a non-pressure wound for 1 of 18 residents (R25) reviewed for quality of care in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility to prevent a decline in range of motion for 1 of 6 (R17) residents reviewed for range of motion in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to transfer a resident safely. This applies to 1 of 18 residents (R69) reviewed for safety in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure ongoing communication and collaboration with an outpatient dialysis center for 1 of 1 resident (R31) reviewed for dialysis services in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received food that accommodated their food preferences and intolerances for 2 of 18 residents (R228, R26) reviewed for food preferences/intolerances in the sample of 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to identify areas of pressure, assess areas of pressure and implement interventions for pressure prevention. These failures resulted in deterioration of the pressure area for R22. These failures resulted in R43's pressure deteriorating into an unstageable pressure injury. These failures resulted in R178 developing a deep tissue injury. This applies to 3 of 8 residents (R22, R43, R178) in the sample of 19 reviewed for pressure.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated in a dignified manner for one of one resident (R178) reviewed for dignity in the sample of 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to shower a resident two times a week. This applies to one of three residents (R228) reviewed for activity of daily living (ADL)'s in the sample of 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to put interventions in place for a resident (R4) with hemiplegia and hemiparesis (muscle weakness or the inability to move on one side of the body that can affect the arms, legs and facial muscles) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for range of motion in the sample of 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to prevent a resident fall, failed to assess a resident after a fall, and failed to transfer residents in a safe manner for two of ten residents (R178, R70) reviewed for safety in the sample of 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure appropriate incontinence care was given and failed to give incontinence care in a manner to prevent cross contamination for a resident with a history of urinary tract infection for 1 of 1 resident (R51) reviewed for incontinence care in a sample of 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to check placement and residuals of a feeding tube prior to starting liquid nutrition for one of two residents (R15) reviewed for feeding tubes in the sample of 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to remove gloves after providing incontinence care and failed to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) as recommended. This applies to 3 of 4 residents (R22, R70, R56) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 19.
32 fire safety citations on file: 7 on July 17, 2024, 11 on August 16, 2023, 14 on August 4, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 23, 2025 | Fine | $22,586 |
| February 21, 2025 | Fine | $10,542 |
| February 21, 2025 | Fine | $11,062 |
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) | 3.35 | 3.45 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.87 | 0.72 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.02 | 3.07 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.02 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.45 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 65.9% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 63.2% | 41.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 5.04 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 3.49 on weekdays and 3.02 on weekends, 13% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.6% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.25 in April to June 2025 to 3.35 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 | 3.35 | 0.87 | 3.49 | 3.02 | 0.6% | 0 of 90 | 75 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.98 | 0.71 | 3.11 | 2.65 | 7.7% | 0 of 92 | 79 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.07 | 0.97 | 3.21 | 2.71 | 17.4% | 0 of 92 | 75 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.25 | 1.08 | 3.43 | 2.78 | 17.1% | 0 of 91 | 75 |
| 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 | 15.8 | 13.4 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 2.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.1 | 14.3 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.0 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 31.8 | 21.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 25.6 | 26.1 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.7 | 13.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 2.0 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Aperion Care Dekalb's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (48.9% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
48.9% 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. 93 eligible stays.
10.2% 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. 112 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. 70 eligible stays.
64.7% 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. 51 residents counted.
2.9% 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. 70 residents counted.
5.0% 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. 70 residents counted.
100.0% 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. 36 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: APERION CARE DEKALB LLC. CMS links this home to Aperion Care, a group of 33 nursing homes averaging 2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Silver Lake Investor Group LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 20% | 09/01/2019 |
| Jeremias, Shraga | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 33% | 09/01/2019 |
| Falk, Erica | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Lemus, Lorena | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Pedre, Manny | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/01/2017 | |
| Ulbert, Lisa | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Frankel, Frederick | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Spector, Jennifer | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Aperion Care Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| Falk, Erica | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Frankel, Frederick | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Lemus, Lorena | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Salwan, Manav | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Spector, Jennifer | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Turofsky, Steven | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Ulbert, Lisa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Wilhelm, Naftali | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Berkowitz, David | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/18/2025 | |
| Meystel, Yosef | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/18/2025 | |
| Turofsky, Steven | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/02/2025 | |
| 1212 South Second St., LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/18/2025 | |
| Aperion Care Exec Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2019 | |
| Aperion Care Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/18/2025 | |
| Aperion Consulting, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| Curis Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| David a Berkowitz Revoc Tr David Berkowitz Ttee | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2019 | |
| Declaration of Trust of Yosef Meystel | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2019 | |
| Silver Lake Investor Group LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2019 | |
| Falk, Erica | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Jeremias, Shraga | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/01/2019 | |
| Lemus, Lorena | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Pedre, Manny | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2017 | |
| Salwan, Manav | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Spector, Jennifer | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Turofsky, Steven | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Ulbert, Lisa | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| Wilhelm, Naftali | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2021 |
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.