ARC AT EL PASO
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
ARC at El Paso currently has a Trust Grade of F, which indicates significant concerns about the quality of care and services provided. Ranking #325 out of 665 facilities in Illinois places it in the top half of the state, but it falls #4 out of 5 in Woodford County, meaning only one local option is better. The facility's condition is worsening, with reported issues increasing from 7 in 2024 to 16 in 2025. Staffing is a notable weakness, with a poor rating of 1 out of 5 stars and reports of failing to provide eight consecutive hours of Registered Nurse coverage daily, which can impact resident care. Specific incidents include a resident at risk of elopement leaving the facility unnoticed and the kitchen failing to maintain proper food safety standards, highlighting serious areas of concern despite having excellent quality measures in place.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Illinois
- #325/665
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 45% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $8,994 in fines. Lower than most Illinois facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 24 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Illinois. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 27 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Illinois average (2.5)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Near Illinois avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 27 deficiencies on record
Sept 2025
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain resident rooms in a clean and safe manner for four residents (R6, R8, R12, and R13) of four reviewed for safe, clean ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed obtain physician ordered weekly weights for one resident of three residents (R1) reviewed for weights in a sample of 15. Findings Include:The f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to implement new interventions after falls and failed to c...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent staff to resident verbal abuse for two of three residents (R2 and R3) reviewed for abuse in a sample of three. Findings include:The...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident's haircut was done safely for 1 of 5 residents (R1...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2025
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with new diagnoses of mental illness after admiss...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow a Physician's Wound Order for one of two residents (R47) reviewed for wound care in a sample of 36.
Findings Include:
T...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. R2's Face Sheet documents R2 is a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Chro...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. R2's Face Sheet documents R2 is a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Chro...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide eight consecutive hours of a Registered Nurse, daily. This failure has the potential to affect all 49 residents residing in the fac...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure prepared refrigerated foods were labeled and dated with an expiration date, opened foods were stored in covered contain...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0887
(Tag F0887)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to offer Covid-19 vaccinations and vaccination education to all employees. This failure has the potential to affect all 49 residents residing ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0947
(Tag F0947)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) were provided and completed Dementia training in a 12 month period. This failure has the potentia...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0847
(Tag F0847)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to explain the arbitration agreement to the resident, or their representative in a form or manner they could understand. This had the potentia...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2025
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure restorative services were being provided for 3 of 3 residents (R1, R2, R3) reviewed for restoratives and range of moti...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide sufficient staff to care for dependent residents. This failure has the potential to affect all 60 residents residing ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2024
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to post the facility Daily Staffing Report daily and, in an area, visible to all residents and visitors. This failure has the pot...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Data
(Tag F0851)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to accurately report the PBJ (pay-roll based journal) staffing information. This failure affects all 58 residing in the facility....
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2024
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0602
(Tag F0602)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect residents from misappropriation of resident property for nine residents (R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12, R13, R14 and R15) of nine resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to keep medications secure for nine residents (R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12, R13, R14 and R15) of nine residents reviewed for medication storage,...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a staff member treated a resident with respect for one of six...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
1 deficiency
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide supervision to a resident identified as an elopement risk, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to: 1) implement an antibiotic stewardship program that included assessing and monitoring residents for signs and symptoms of infections; 2) en...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide sufficient staffing to meet the needs of the residents for four residents (R1, R2, R4, and R5) out of five residents reviewed for a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the medications as ordered by the physician to two (R32 and R103) of five residents reviewed for medication administration in a sample of 25. This fa...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
ased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored and labeled with identification and dates; and failed to ensure a bleach cleaning chemical was not stor...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure facility staffing information was posted with accurate hours and completed daily. This failure has the potential to af...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 27 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • Grade F (21/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Arc At El Paso's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns ARC AT EL PASO an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Illinois, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Arc At El Paso Staffed?
CMS rates ARC AT EL PASO's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 45%, compared to the Illinois average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. RN turnover specifically is 57%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Arc At El Paso?
State health inspectors documented 27 deficiencies at ARC AT EL PASO during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 24 with potential for harm, and 2 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Arc At El Paso?
ARC AT EL PASO is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by ARCADIA CARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 65 certified beds and approximately 54 residents (about 83% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in EL PASO, Illinois.
How Does Arc At El Paso Compare to Other Illinois Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Illinois, ARC AT EL PASO's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (45%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Arc At El Paso?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the substantiated abuse finding on record, and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Arc At El Paso Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, ARC AT EL PASO has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Illinois. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Arc At El Paso Stick Around?
ARC AT EL PASO has a staff turnover rate of 45%, which is about average for Illinois nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Arc At El Paso Ever Fined?
ARC AT EL PASO has been fined $8,994 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Illinois average of $33,169. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Arc At El Paso on Any Federal Watch List?
ARC AT EL PASO is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.