339 9th Avenue, La Grange, IL 60525 · Cook County · (708) 354-4660
197 certified beds, about 152 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2005
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 146093 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 25, 2025, inspectors cited 11 health deficiencies (the Illinois average is 12.6, the national average 9.2).
Of 46 health citations since May 2023, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $57,714 in the last three years; the largest was $36,986, and the latest is dated January 13, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.72 hours per resident per day, against 3.45 across Illinois and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.89 of those hours.
46.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Illinois average 44.5%).
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 there was sufficient unlicensed nursing staff to meet resident needs. This applies to 15 residents (R1, R4, R6, R8-R11, R14-R21) reviewed for daily staffing levels.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure progress notes and orders from a Dermatologist were obtained and carried out in a timely manner for a resident with basal cell carcinoma. This applies to 1 resident (R2) reviewed for non-pressure wounds.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to administer medications. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for medication administration in a sample of 6.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide appropriately sized incontinence briefs to a resident to prevent skin irritation. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for quality of care in a sample of 11.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain the kitchen in a manner that prevent foodborne illness. This applies to 128 residents receiving dietary services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess residents to self-medicate. This applies to 4 of 4 residents (R96, R16, R2, R25) reviewed for self-administration in a sample of 30.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to safely store medications. This applies to 10 out of 10 residents (R136, R153, R154, R155, R156, R126, R127, R138, R66, and R52) reviewed for medication storage in a sample of 30.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement transmission-based precautions for a resident with an acute GI (gastrointestinal infection). The facility also failed to follow contact and enhanced-barrier precautions and hand-hygiene when providing resident care. This applies to 5 out of 5 residents (R152, R117, R41, R104, and R8) reviewed for infection control in a sample of 30.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement its antibiotic stewardship program to monitor residents receiving antibiotics. This applies to 4 out of 4 residents (R152, R75, R117, and R136) reviewed for antibiotic use in a sample of 30.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide maintenance services for a safe, comfortable and homelike environment. This applies to 1 of 1 (R48) resident reviewed for safe home like environment, in a sample of 30Findings include:On 07/22/2025 at 10:37 AM the molding of R48's cardiac table, stationed next to R48's bed, was broken and hanging downwards. R48 stated it had been broken for more than two weeks, that he had asked them to repair it and it was not done yet. On 7/23/25 at 2:15 PM the molding of R48's over bed table was still broken and hanging to the floor. R48 stated he had told multiple nursing staff about it. On 7/24/25 at 1:10 PM the molding around R48's cardiac table next to R48's bed was still broken and hanging downwards. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to facilitate non-discriminatory discharge planning that meets the resident's preferences by allowing the resident to remain in the facility and paying privately for a bed. This applies to 1 resident (R5) reviewed for discharge planning in a sample of 30 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to review and revise resident care plans to reflect significant incidents/changes in condition. This applies to 2 of 2 residents (R25 and R36) reviewed for care plans in a sample of 30.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation interview and record review the facility failed to provide incontinence care for a dependent resident. This applies to 1 of 9 residents (R11) reviewed for ADL (Activities of Daily Living) in a sample of 30 .
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's equipment and environment were free from accident hazards, and failed to ensure a resident with known wandering habits was supervised to prevent a fall. This failure resulted in the emergent transfer to the hospital for 2 residents due to fall incidents. This applies to 2 of 2 residents (R25 and R36) reviewed for accidents and supervision in a sample of 30.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to safely maintain and reconcile controlled medication counting logs for residents receiving narcotics. This applies to 2 out of 3 residents (R11 and R34) reviewed for narcotics in a sample of 30.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to conduct quarterly Interdisciplinary Team meetings and invite residents and / or their POA (Power of Attorney) to participate in their care planning process. This applies to 6 of 6 residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, and R6) reviewed for care plan meetings in a sample of 6.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to have physician-ordered medications available. This applies to 3 of 7 residents (R1, R2 and R3) reviewed for medication availability in a sample of 6.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow safe medication administration practice to avoid a significant medication error. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for significant medication error in a sample of 3.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident identified with confusion, poor safety awareness, ambulatory, and had verbalization of wanting to exit the facility, was provided supervision to prevent elopement from the facility. The facility also failed to ensure the door on the ground floor leads to courtyard and main street was in good repair and had a working alarm system to alert facility staff of a resident attempting to exit the facility. This failure resulted in R1 eloping from the facility without being witnessed by facility staff during the early hours on December 29, 2024. This applies to 1 of 7 residents (R1) reviewed for risk of elopement in the sample of 7. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who developed facility-acquired pressure ulcers were assessed by the wound care physician/NP-Nurse Practitioner; failed to ensure the residents received nutritional interventions to promote wound healing; failed to put interventions in place to prevent pressure ulcers from deteriorating; failed to provide wound care treatments as ordered by the physician; and failed to follow their policy to do a root cause analysis for residents with facility-acquired pressure ulcers. This failures resulted in R1's facility-acquired pressure ulcer increasing in size, and R1's DTI (Deep Tissue Injury) progressing to an unstageable pressure ulcer. This applies to 3 of 3 residents (R1, R2, R3) reviewed for facility-acquired pressure ulcers in the sample of 3.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to safely transfer a resident while using a mechanical lift. As a result of this failure, R1 sustained a laceration to the head and fracture of the thoracic 8 and 12 vertebral bodies after falling. R1 was transferred to the local hospital and received 2 staples to the back of R1's head. This applies to 2 of 6 residents (R1 and R7) reviewed for falls and accidents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to administer medications at ordered times. There were 31 opportunities with 8 errors resulting in a 25.8% medication error rate. This applies to 5 of 6 residents (R12, R13, R17, R18, R19) observed in the medication pass. 1) R12's electronic face sheet printed on 7/28/24 showed R12 has diagnoses including but not limited to dementia without behaviors, type 2 diabetes, diverticulitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, major depressive disorder. R12's medication administration record for July 2024 showed R12 receives famotidine 10mg at 8:00AM and memantine 10mg at 8:00AM and 4:00PM. On 7/28/24 at 10:30AM, V3 (Licensed Practical Nurse) administered R12's memantine 10mg. (2 hours and 30 minutes past the scheduled administration time). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to assess a resident's wound, failed to initiate treatment as ordered by a physician for a resident (R1) that obtained a skin tear. This applies to 1 of 3 residents reviewed for wounds in the sample of 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment as ordered by a physician for a resident (R1) with a stage 4 pressure ulcer. This applies to 1 of 3 residents reviewed for wounds in the sample of 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident (R13) was free from a significant medication error. This applies to 1 of 6 residents observed in the medication pass.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure menus were followed. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R4) reviewed for menus in the sample of 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure resident medications were available for administration for 2 of 3 residents (R3, R4) reviewed for medications in the sample of 4.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow standard infection control practices with regards to hand hygiene and gloving during provisions of incontinence carer and administration of medications. This applies to 4 of 31 residents (R79, R85, R94, R503) reviewed for infection control in the sample of 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who requires assistance for activities of daily living (ADL) care were assisted for shaving and nail clipping. This applies to 2 of 3 residents (R84, R85) reviewed for ADL care in the sample of 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident's medications were administered by the nurse and not left at the bedside for the resident to take on his own. This applies to 1 of 31 residents (R41) reviewed for medications at the bedside in the sample of 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician's order and treatment plan for a resident who has pressure ulcers. This applies to 1 of 6 residents (R503) reviewed for pressure ulcers in the sample of 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to assess and provide splints and therapy services to residents, to prevent further reduction in ROM (range of motion). This applies to 2 of 4 residents (R34 and R40) reviewed for range of motion in the sample of 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide timely incontinence care and peri-care in a manner that would prevent urinary tract infection (UTI). This applies to 2 of 6 residents (R94, R503) reviewed for bowel and bladder care in the sample of 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to change a resident's Midline line dressing per facility policy and procedure. This applies to 1 of 3 resident's (R19) reviewed for IV (intravenous) catheter care in the sample of 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to administer medication as prescribed by the physician and failed to ensure the medications being administered via gastrostomy tube were completely given to the resident. There were 6 errors observed out of the 25-medication opportunities resulting in a 24% medication error rate. This applies to 2 of 5 residents (R112, R129) reviewed during medication pass in the sample of 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility dietary staff failed to follow a resident's tray card and served the resident a food item she was known to be allergic to. This applies to 1 of 1 resident (R18) reviewed for food allergies in the sample of 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow the plan of care regarding the required number of staff assistance during bed mobility of a resident. This failure resulted in R1 sustaining an acute closed displaced supracondylar fracture of the distal end of the right femur after R1 fell off the bed during care on 11/4/2023. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for falls in the sample of 3.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to serve food to residents at a palatable temperature. This has the potential to affect all 155 residents consuming food from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were assisted with eating in a dignified manner for 2 of 26 residents (R91 and R105) reviewed for dignity in the sample of 26.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the call light was within reach for a resident who is dependent on staff for assistance for 1 of 1 resident (R57) reviewed for call lights in the sample of 26.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident with dysphagia was fed safely and failed to ensure a gait belt was used to safely transfer a resident for 2 of 26 residents (R14 and R27) reviewed for safety in the sample of 26.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a urinary drainage bag was secure and off the floor for a resident and failed to ensure incontinence care was thoroughly completed for a resident. This applies to 2 of 4 residents (R22 & R19) reviewed for catheters and urinary tract infections in the sample of 23.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident was observed during medication administration for 1 of 26 residents (R39) reviewed for pharmacy services in the sample of 26.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure PRN (as needed) anti-anxiety (psychotropic) medications had a duration/end date. This applies to 2 of 5 residents (R429, R48) reviewed for unnecessary medications in the sample of 26.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility staff failed to ensure the ordered dose of insulin was administered to a resident for 1 of 4 residents (R88) reviewed for significant medication errors in the sample of 26.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents on a pureed diet were served protein at the noon meal. This applies to 2 of 15 residents (R6 & R14) reviewed for pureed diets in the sample of 26.
41 fire safety citations on file: 13 on July 25, 2025, 13 on June 6, 2024, 15 on May 24, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| January 13, 2025 | Fine | $36,986 |
| December 9, 2024 | Fine | $20,728 |
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) | 3.72 | 3.45 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.89 | 0.72 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.06 | 3.07 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.05 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.78 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 46.8% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 51.3% | 41.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.97 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 3.99 on weekdays and 3.05 on weekends, 24% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 4.9% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.03 in April to June 2025 to 3.72 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 | 3.72 | 0.89 | 3.99 | 3.05 | 4.9% | 0 of 90 | 152 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.97 | 0.83 | 4.21 | 3.36 | 4.8% | 0 of 92 | 141 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.07 | 0.97 | 4.36 | 3.33 | 4.9% | 0 of 92 | 130 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.03 | 0.82 | 4.31 | 3.33 | 5.2% | 0 of 91 | 137 |
| 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 | 14.8 | 13.4 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 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 | 3.8 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.0 | 14.3 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.4 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 16.6 | 21.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.1 | 26.1 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.3 | 13.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.5 | 2.0 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 2.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Meadowbrook Manor - Lagrange's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (60.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
60.5% this home
Better than 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. 689 eligible stays.
10.6% 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. 584 eligible stays.
8.8% 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. 414 eligible stays.
31.4% 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. 210 residents counted.
0.9% 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. 348 residents counted.
2.6% 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. 347 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 16 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: BUTTERFIELD HEALTH CARE VII, LLC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chris Vangel Gst Exempt Descendants Trust | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 5% | 08/22/2005 |
| Jafari Family LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 25% | 08/22/2005 |
| Katherine Hocuk Gst Exempt Descendants Trust | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 5% | 08/26/2005 |
| Louis William Dimas Family Limited Partnership | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 15% | 08/26/2005 |
| Rbj Investments LP | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 25% | 08/22/2005 |
| Vangel, Dorothy | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 13% | 08/22/2005 |
| Vangel, Nicholas | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 13% | 08/22/2005 |
| Vangel, Christopher | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 09/07/2005 | |
| Jafari, Kianoosh | Corporate director | Individual | 09/07/2005 | |
| Vangel, Christopher | Corporate director | Individual | 09/07/2005 | |
| Vangel, Nicholas | Corporate director | Individual | 09/07/2005 |
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.