Home / Illinois / South Holland
16000 South Wabash, South Holland, IL 60473 · Cook County · (708) 339-0600
135 certified beds, about 114 residents a day · For profit - Individual · Medicare and Medicaid since 1997
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 145927 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 12, 2025, inspectors cited 11 health deficiencies (the Illinois average is 12.6, the national average 9.2).
Of 66 health citations since November 2023, 11 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 6 fines totaling $285,340 in the last three years; the largest was $123,940, and the latest is dated February 8, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.26 hours per resident per day, against 3.45 across Illinois and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.59 of those hours.
44.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Illinois average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Icare Consulting Services, an affiliated group of 7 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 66 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement fall preventive measures for a resident who is a high fall risk. This deficiency affects one (R3) of three residents reviewed for Falls prevention program.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a hazard free environment for two (R1, R5) of 4 (R1, R2, R4 and R5) residents reviewed for hazards/supervision. This failure resulted in R1 getting out of bed and falling on an uncovered radiator heater resulting in R1 suffering second degree burns to the right shoulder and right hip and admitted to the hospital's burn intensive care unit for evaluation and treatment of severe burns. This failure also resulted in R5 suffering a laceration to the left eye that required sutures, subdural hematomas that required R5 to be admitted to the hospital's intensive care unit and ultimately resulted in admission to hospice due to the subdural hematoma. The immediate jeopardy began on 2/07/2026 when R1 was found lying on an uncovered radiator heater. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to meet the resident needs and failed to ensure the facility was staffed in accordance with the facility assessment. This failure affects all 112 residents that reside within the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have sufficient dietary staff to meet resident needs and to serve meals timely. This failure affected all 106 residents that consume food from the facility's kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure menu variety for dinner, failed to honor resident preferences and cultural/ethnic considerations, failed to follow recipes for the written menu, and failed to obtain dietician input for any substitutions made to the recipes/menu. This failure affected all 106 residents that consume food from the facility's kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to serve food to residents in a manner that is palatable and attractive. This failure has the potential to affect all 106 residents that consume food from the facility's kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to procure sufficient amounts of food ingredients to properly follow the written menu and failed to have enough food items to follow written menu/serve every resident according to the written menu. This failure affected all 106 residents that consume meals from the facility's kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to address any ethnic, cultural or religious factors that may potentially affect the care provided by the facility, including but not limited to, activities and food and nutrition services and failed to identify a staffing plan for nutritional support staff. These failures have the potential to affect all 112 residents that reside within the facility. Facility census (2/11/2026) documents in part that 112 residents reside within the facility. R4's Face Sheet documents in part the following diagnoses: rhabdomyolysis, fusion of spine (lumbar region), inflammatory spondylopathy lumbar region, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, unspecified protein calorie malnutrition, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and major depressive disorder without psychotic features. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide incontinence care for residents that were dependent on staff for incontinence care. This failure affected four (R1 R3 R4 and R5) of four residents reviewed for incontinence care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure timely assessment and implementation of preventative measures to prevent the development of a pressure ulcer for one (R1) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. This failure resulted in R1 developing a facility-acquired Stage 3 pressure ulcer to the coccyx.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate clinical records by not retaining skin assessment and skin monitoring documentation necessary to demonstrate compliance with physician orders as part of the resident's medical record. This failure applied to one (R1) of three residents reviewed for medical records.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent staff to resident physical abuse and neglect. These failures resulted in R1 sustaining a fractured left humerus and R3 sustaining moisture associated skin damage/skin breakdown. These failures affected two (R1 and R3) of six residents reviewed for abuse/neglect.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide incontinence care and showers for one (R1) resident that was dependent on staff for ADL (activities of daily living) care. This failure affected one (R1) of six residents reviewed for ADL care. This failure resulted in R1 experiencing pain and development of moisture associated skin damage (open areas). R1's face sheet documents in part that R1 is a [AGE] year-old resident with a prior medical history including: hemiplegia affecting left side, type 2 diabetes mellitus, depression, hypothyroidism, and hypertension. R1's MDS dated [DATE], documents R1 has a BIMS summary score of 13, indicating that R1 is cognitively intact. Additionally, the MDS indicates R1 did not have any moisture associated skin damage at the time of the assessment. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their abuse policy; failed to suspend a staff member pending an allegation of staff to resident physical abuse; and failed to prevent retaliation of a staff member after reporting abuse. This failure affects one (R3) of six residents reviewed for abuse and has the potential to affect all 118 residents that reside within the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to respond and resolve resident grievances in a timely manner. This failure affects one of six residents (R1) reviewed for grievances.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to report an injury of unknown origin to the state survey agency within 2 hours for one (R3) of six residents reviewed for reporting. This failure resulted in R3 experiencing left arm pain and swelling and being transferred to the hospital and diagnosed with closed supracondylar fracture of the left humerus.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that two-person assistance was utilized during resident care, as required by the resident's care plan, to maintain safety. This deficient practice affected one of three residents (Resident #13) reviewed for safety during care. As a result, Resident #13 fell from the bed during care, which led to the dislodgement of the resident's gastrostomy tube and required hospitalization for replacement. On 9/12/25 at 9:37 AM, R13 was observed able to nod head yes or no to questions asked. When questioned if able to raise arms off bed, R13 nodded head 'no'. On 9/9/25 at 4:00 PM, V2 DON (director of nursing) stated V2 wrote up V9 CNA (certified nurse aide) for improper care resulting in R13's fall out of bed. V2 stated R13 is a two-person assist with all care. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide sufficient RN (registered nurse) coverage for the second quarter of 2025. Per PBJ (payroll based journal) requirements there should be an RN working 8 consecutive hours 7 days a week. This failure has the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and record review, the facility failed to follow their recipe by not utilizing the appropriate serving size for zucchini, lettuce and cheese during lunch service. This has the potential to affect all 58 resident receiving regular diet. In addition, the facility, failed to provide pureed tortilla during lunch service for 20 of 20 residents receiving pureed diets.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the dishwasher was working to provide the correct sanitation solution during washing and utilized the dishes for the next meal service. In addition, the facility failed to follow their thawing policy by leaving raw pork on the stove top (that was off) and reaching a danger zone temperature of 60 degrees after being left out for over four hours. This has the potential to affect all 99 residents receiving meals.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, this facility failed to ensure the call light cord was within reach for two residents (R59 and R63) out of three residents reviewed for call light accessibility in a sample of 104.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to have an appropriate diagnosis for the use of antipsychotic medications and failed to identify a specific behavior for the use of an antipsychotic medication. This failure affected one resident (R10) out of four residents reviewed for chemical restraints in a sample of 104.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to follow their smoking at risk program policy and develop an at risk plan of care. This affects one of three (R56) residents reviewed for safe smoking care plan interventions. During survey tour from on 9/9/25 between hour of 11:17am -11:39am, R56 was observed with a cigarette lighter. R56 said it was his lighter for his cigarettes.9/9/25 V2 (Director of Nursing) said residents should not have cigarette lighters in their possession, it's the facility policy. V2 made aware R56 was observed with a cigarette lighter.9/12/25 at 12:27pm V2 (Director of Nursing) stated her expectation is the staff conduct and complete an accurate assessment of the residents. V2 said care plan are individualized, and the assessments drives the plan of care is developed for the residents. V2 said R56 does smoke. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to successfully implement interventions to prevent resident (R17) from losing weight. This failure resulted in the resident experiencing a significant weight loss of 6 percent in one month and a significant weight loss of 11.3 percent within six months for one of seven reviewed for nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to have an appropriate diagnosis for the use of antipsychotic medications, failed to identify a specific behavior for the use of an antipsychotic medication. This failure affected one resident (R10) out of four reviewed for unnecessary medications in a sample of 104.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to set up a dental referral/appointment for one resident (R62) who required a tooth extraction for one of one reviewed for dental services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, V8 (nurse) failed to sanitize or wash her hand during medication administration. This affected two of three (R3, R32) residents reviewed for hand washing during medication administration. Findings Include: On 9/10/25 at 9:00am, during medication pass, V8 (nurse) administered R3's morning medications, return to the medication cart and proceed to prepare R32's morning medications without washing her hands or using hand sanitizer. V8 said she was supposed to clean her hands after she gave R3 her medication and before she prepared R32's medication. V8 said she forgot to clean her hands in between residents. V8 said she will clean her hands now. On 9/12/25 at 12:30pm, V2 (DON) said hand hygiene should be performed in between resident during medication administration to prevent the spread of infections. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their abuse policy by not keeping a resident (R2) with dementia free from being hit by a cognitively intact resident (R1) for one out of four residents reviewed for physical abuse in a total sample of six.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and monitoring for residents. This failure affects six (R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12) out of twelve residents reviewed for supervision and monitoring.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to complete a post fall assessment of a resident immediately following a fall; failed to ensure a resident's physician was notified after a fall; failed to ensure residents received medications as ordered by the physician; and failed to ensure the physician was notified of abnormal lab results. These failures applied to three of four residents (R3, R4, R5) reviewed for quality of care and resulted in R3 having a delay in care of approximately two days after a fall in which R3 was found to have a hip fracture that required surgical intervention.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to follow their policies for care planning and fall prevention by not ensuring care plans were developed based on assessments and individual needs; by not reviewing and updating care plans for appropriateness; and by not ensuring adequate personalized interventions were identified. This failure applied to two of four residents (R3 and R5) reviewed for care planning.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to follow their policy and procedures for hydration by not ensuring a nutrition assessment was completed, not ensuring a hydration care plan was developed or interventions implemented, and not notifying the physician of abnormal labs related to hydration for a newly admitted resident assessed to be at risk for dehydration. This failure applied to one of four residents (R5) reviewed for hydration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to follow resident care assessment and plan in providing adequate supervision and monitoring of residents with severe cognitive impairment for two (R3 and R4) of four residents reviewed for accidents and supervision. This deficiency resulted in R4 had a fall in the dining room and sustained a comminuted and mildly displaced fractures of the left medial acetabular wall and root of the superior pubic ramus (hip/pelvic area).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to protect a resident with severe cognitive impaired from physical abuse and failed to develop care plan interventions in preventing abuse for two (R1 and R2) of four residents reviewed for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to replace a broken domestic water heater that provide hot water to resident's bathroom sinks and shower room. This affected eight of eight residents (R3-R6, R8-R11) reviewed for hot water and homelike conditions. Finding Includes: On 1/9/25 at 10:50am, V3 (maintenance director) said, We had an issues with the hot water for a few days. We have two hot water tanks that supply domestic water/ water to the resident's room and the three compartment sink in the kitchen. One of the two water tanks is broken. The other functioning water tank is having a work load stain. On 1/9/25 at 10:54am, V3 tested the water temperature from R8's - R11's bathroom sink after letting it run for 20- 30 seconds the water temped at 77 degrees F for all the sinks. R8-R11's bathroom sink water was cold to touch. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to identify and treat wounds on a resident (R1) before R1 was sent out to the hospital for one of three residents reviewed for wound care in a total sample of eight. This failure resulted in the unidentified wounds being present on R1's heels for an unknown amount of time without being treated. Findings Include: R1 is an [AGE] year old with the following diagnosis: type 2 diabetes, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), and rheumatoid arthritis. A Nursing note dated 11/3/24 documents R1 had a boil on the sacrum that burst and left an open area. The nurse practitioner was notified and ordered to cleanse the wound daily and apply a dry dressing. A Physician note dated 11/13/24 documents R1 currently has no concerns and is at baseline. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to monitor a high fall risk resident (R2) during a scheduled monitoring period for one out of three residents reviewed for falls in a total sample of eight. This failure resulted in R2 suffering a right fractured hip after falling from a chair while reaching out for a nearby object when unsupervised. Findings Include: R2 is an [AGE] year old with the following diagnosis: history of falling, dementia, and age-related osteoporosis. A Nursing note dated 12/8/24 documents it was reported by the CNA (V9) that R2 slid out of a chair attempting to reach for something that was in another chair. V9 reported R2 fell onto the right hip. R2 denied any pain upon assessment and was placed back into bed. X-rays of the hip/pelvis were ordered. R2 remains alert and oriented times one per baseline. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record the facility failed to follow the plan of care for a dependent resident and ensure to provide two persons assist with transfer using mechanical lift for 1 of 1 resident (R2). R2 transferred using mechanical lift, R2 was subsequently observed with bruise over left eyebrow and swelling to right jaw. R2 was sent to hospital evaluation and diagnosed forehead contusion.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the bed rails/side rails were in use and in the up position for one of three residents (R1). R1 hit her right eye on the bedrail. R1 observed with discoloration to right eye and redden sclera. This affects R1 reviewed for bedrail use.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policy by failing to provide an individualized plan of care with effective interventions to prevent falls; the facility failed to provide supervision while walking in corridors per resident assessment. These failures applied to one (R1) of five residents reviewed for falls and resulted in R1 having three falls in the last three months and requiring hospital transfer for medical treatment of a laceration and hematoma after the last two falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their abuse policy by not immediately reporting an allegation of staff to resident physical abuse to the administrator and failing to report to the state agency within 2 hours for one of three (R1) residents reviewed for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to always have sufficient staff available to provide nursing services to meet the residents' needs in the facility. This has a potential to affect 105 residents currently residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify responsible parties and perform comprehensive assessment for a resident with an injury of unknown origin for one (R84) of two reviewed for abuse in the sample of 42.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff was provided adequate abuse prevention education. This failure has a potential to affect 63 residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to report alleged abuse to the state regulatory agency within timely manner for one (R84) of two residents reviewed for abuse in the sample of 42.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate alleged abuse for one (R84) of two residents reviewed for abuse in the sample of 42.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician orders and failed to follow their policy for restorative programs by failing to obtain a physician order for a restorative device for 1 (R16) resident and failed to apply a splint/brace, or restorative device to prevent further contracture formation for 2 residents (R16 and R80) out of 3 residents reviewed for limited range of motion and rehabilitation.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to monitor and prevent a cognitively impaired resident from sustaining an injury for one (R84) of two residents reviewed for accidents in the sample of 42.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide an arbitration agreement to a resident/representative that provided 30 days after signing to rescind the agreement. This failure applies to 1 (R23) resident of 1 reviewed for arbitration agreements.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to follow their policy and procedures for fall prevention by not using all possible methods for identifying risk factors for falls, not implementing personalized and effective interventions, not ensuring new interventions were implemented with each fall, and not providing adequate supervision for residents at risk for falls. This failure applies to two of five residents (R1 and R4) reviewed for falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and records reviewed the facility failed to ensure one resident (R6) remained free from resident to resident sexual assault. This affected two of three residents (R6, R8) reviewed sexual abuse. This failure resulted in R6 being kissed in the mouth unwantedly by R8. R6 said she feels scared and on-guard when walking past R8.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and records reviewed the facility failed to provide incontinence care at every 2 hours. This affected one of three R1 residents reviewed for incontinence care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and records reviewed the facility failed to carry out physician orders to include dietary changes and a doppler study. This affected three of three residents (R1, R7, and R3) reviewed for physician orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and records reviewed the facility failed to ensure one resident with a diagnosis of Dementia, remained free of antipsychotic medication without an appropriate diagnosis. This affects one of three residents (R2) reviewed for unnecessary medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and records reviewed the facility failed to protect one resident (R1) from being exploited by a staff person who offered her personal care services and the costs for that care and then discharged R1 into her care. This affected one of three (R1) residents reviewed for exploitation. This failure resulted in R1 being discharged to the care of V1 (social worker) without consent or the family's knowledge.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and records reviewed the facility failed to follow their practice and obtain a signature to ensure resident was signed out to the responsible person upon discharge. This affected one of three residents (R1) reviewed for discharge summary. This failure resulted in R1 being discharged to the facility social worker (V1) instead of the family.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident was safely discharged into the community with a family member by allowing facility staff V1 (social service) to discharge the resident (R1) into her private care. This affected one of three residents R1 reviewed for safe discharge. This failure resulted in R1 being discharged into care of V1 without the facility's or family's knowledge.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, intervention, and record review the facility failed to label medications with names, opened and use by dates; store medications that require refrigeration in the refrigerator, and maintain the correct count for Schedule II medications in two of two medication carts. This failure has the potential to affect 11 residents reviewed for medication storage in the sample of 22.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure assistance with shaving is provided to resident who is unable to carry out the task to maintain good personal hygiene for one of two residents (R58) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) in a sample of 22.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to prevent deterioration of pressure ulcer upon admission and failed to follow manufacturer recommendation in using low air loss mattress to resident with stage 4 pressure ulcer. The facility also failed to update the wound care plan. This deficiency affects one (R342) of three residents in the sample of 22 reviewed for Pressure Ulcer Management.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents with limited mobility and contractures are evaluated and provided treatment to prevent further development of contractures. This deficiency affects one (R82) of three residents in the sample of 22 reviewed for Restorative Program.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure resident's mouth was clear and free from food residual after feeding a resident who is on aspiration precaution. This deficiency affects one (R35) of three residents in the sample of 22 reviewed for Resident safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow physician order for oxygen dosage for one of three residents (R24) reviewed for oxygen therapy in a sample of 22.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide medications as ordered for two residents (R13 and R41) of six residents reviewed for medication administration in the sample of 22.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow it policy on infection control by ensuring nebulizer mask was properly stored in a plastic bag and not left open to air. The facility also failed to ensure that isolation gown was removed when coming out of an isolation room. This failure affected two of two residents (R25 and R29) observed for infection control in a sample of 22.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and records review the facility did not provide scheduled maintenance to essential equipment according to manufacturer's recommendations. This failure contributed to one of the mechanical lifts not being available to provide the necessary assistance to R1 (1 of three residents interviewed R1,R7 and R8) , so that he could attend to his daily routine including dialysis. R1 is a [AGE] year-old male whose diagnosis includes diabetes mellitus due to underlying condition with chronic kidney disease, acute (congestive) systolic heart failure, end stage renal disease, malignant neoplasm of right kidney, acute kidney failure, unspecified, dependence on renal dialysis, encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, encounter for change or removal of surgical wound dressing. [...]
19 fire safety citations on file: 7 on October 24, 2024, 8 on December 15, 2023, 4 on February 24, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 8, 2026 | Fine | $123,940 |
| December 18, 2025 | Fine | $37,830 |
| September 12, 2025 | Fine | $16,585 |
| September 12, 2025 | Payment Denial | 3 days from October 4, 2025 |
| February 27, 2025 | Fine | $20,470 |
| October 24, 2024 | Fine | $83,097 |
| October 24, 2024 | Payment Denial | 82 days from December 5, 2024 |
| February 6, 2024 | Fine | $3,418 |
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) | 3.26 | 3.45 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.59 | 0.72 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.67 | 3.07 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.05 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.62 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 44.1% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 46.7% | 41.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.68 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 3.50 on weekdays and 2.67 on weekends, 24% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 3.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.46 in April to June 2025 to 3.26 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 | 3.26 | 0.59 | 3.50 | 2.67 | 3.3% | 0 of 90 | 114 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.44 | 0.55 | 3.67 | 2.87 | 2.0% | 0 of 92 | 110 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.53 | 0.61 | 3.81 | 2.85 | 2.5% | 0 of 92 | 105 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.46 | 0.56 | 3.72 | 2.79 | 2.1% | 0 of 91 | 105 |
| 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.
| 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 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.4 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.0 | 2.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.3 | 14.3 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.7 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 21.5 | 21.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 43.7 | 26.1 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.3 | 13.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 2.0 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.4 | 2.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Prairie Oasis's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (46.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
46.6% 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. 32 eligible stays.
9.7% 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. 51 eligible stays.
8.5% 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. 35 eligible stays.
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: 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. 18 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. 37 residents counted.
3.2% 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. 37 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. 5 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: PRAIRIE OASIS LLC. CMS links this home to Icare Consulting Services, a group of 7 nursing homes averaging 1.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chankin, Kevin | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 7% | 02/01/2018 |
| Levovitz, Yeruchom | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 41% | 02/01/2018 |
| Webster, Shimon | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 44% | 02/01/2018 |
| Cibc Bank USA | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 10/30/2019 | |
| Amico, Julie | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 02/01/2018 | |
| Junious Lyons, Michele | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 02/01/2018 | |
| Pointe Management LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/20/2020 | |
| Levovitz, Yeruchom | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/21/2020 | |
| Webster, Shimon | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/21/2020 |
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.