GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Galena Stauss Nursing Home has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and a poor overall standing. It ranks #238 out of 665 facilities in Illinois, placing it in the top half, but it is #2 out of 2 in Jo Daviess County, meaning only one local option is better. The facility is showing some improvement, with the number of reported issues decreasing from 10 to 8 in the past year, but it still has 18 total deficiencies, including a critical failure to implement an effective infection control program that affected multiple residents. Staffing is a mixed bag; while the turnover rate is an impressive 0%, the overall staffing rating is only 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average. Additionally, the facility has been fined $154,852, higher than 93% of Illinois facilities, raising concerns about ongoing compliance issues. On a positive note, the nursing home has better RN coverage than 89% of state facilities, which can help identify and address problems early. However, specific incidents, such as failing to manage infection control and not implementing necessary Legionella safety measures, highlight serious weaknesses in care and management practices.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Illinois
- #238/665
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- Turnover data not reported for this facility.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $154,852 in fines. Higher than 90% of Illinois facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 56 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Illinois. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Near Illinois average (2.5)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
The Ugly 18 deficiencies on record
Oct 2024
8 deficiencies
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to assess non-pressure wounds, failed to have treatments in place for w...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to assess a pressure injury, failed to treat a pressure injury, and failed to notify the physician of a pressure injury. This app...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
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 ensure resident oxygen tubing was replaced monthly fo...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to have licensed staff administer medicated powder. The applies to 1 of 1 residents (R10) reviewed for pharmacy services in the sample of 13.
T...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
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 protect a resident (R40) from a significant medicatio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store 2 residents (R9,R12) controlled medications under a double lock system. This applies to 2 of 2 residents outside of the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to submit quarterly reports to the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ).
This failure has the potential to affect all residents in the facility.
The fi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their policy regarding Legionella management. This failure has the potential to affect all residents in the building.
The finding...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0557
(Tag F0557)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a dignity bag was in place over an indwelling urinary catheter drainage bag for 1 of 1 residents (R6) reviewed for dign...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2) R33's electronic face sheet printed on 10/11/23 showed R33 has diagnoses including but not limited to atrial fibrillation, ty...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
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 prevent a significant medication error for 1 of 1 residents (R36) r...
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** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain physician's orders for a resident (R8) to util...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0838
(Tag F0838)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and maintain a facility assessment. This failure has the potential to affect all residents in the facility.
The findings include:
T...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
5 deficiencies
1 IJ (1 facility-wide)
CRITICAL
(L)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have an Infection Control program and system in place...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
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 supervise a resident who smokes for 1 of 4 residents ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to prepare pureed foods according to the recipe to preserve nutritive value and flavor. This applies to 1 of 1 residents (R15) re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to either offer, provide, or educate residents regarding flu and pneumo...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0886
(Tag F0886)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to document and record negative COVID testing for staff. This failure has the potential to affect all residents in the facility.
...
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?"
- "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: 1 life-threatening violation(s), $154,852 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 18 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $154,852 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Illinois. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (38/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Galena Stauss's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Illinois, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Galena Stauss Staffed?
CMS rates GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes.
What Have Inspectors Found at Galena Stauss?
State health inspectors documented 18 deficiencies at GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME during 2023 to 2024. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 17 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Galena Stauss?
GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 57 certified beds and approximately 39 residents (about 68% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in GALENA, Illinois.
How Does Galena Stauss Compare to Other Illinois Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Illinois, GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.5 and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Galena Stauss?
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?" "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?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Galena Stauss Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #1 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 Galena Stauss Stick Around?
GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME has not reported staff turnover data to CMS. Staff turnover matters because consistent caregivers learn residents' individual needs, medications, and preferences. When staff frequently change, this institutional knowledge is lost. Families should ask the facility directly about their staff retention rates and average employee tenure.
Was Galena Stauss Ever Fined?
GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME has been fined $154,852 across 1 penalty action. This is 4.5x the Illinois average of $34,627. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.
Is Galena Stauss on Any Federal Watch List?
GALENA STAUSS NURSING HOME 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.