CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
The Citadel of Glenview has a Trust Grade of C, which means it is considered average-neither particularly good nor bad compared to other facilities. It ranks #130 out of 665 nursing homes in Illinois, placing it in the top half of the state, and #46 out of 201 in Cook County, indicating that only 45 local options are better. The facility is currently improving, having reduced issues from 18 in 2023 to zero in 2024, which is a positive sign. Staffing is a concern, with a rating of 2 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 28%, which is below the state average, suggesting some stability among staff despite overall low ratings. However, the facility has faced significant fines totaling $47,853, which is average compared to other facilities, but still points to potential compliance issues. Specific incidents noted by inspectors included failures in proper sanitation of dishes, which could affect many residents, and two serious deficiencies were highlighted, though details were not available. While there are strengths in the facility's ranking and improving trend, the sanitation issues and staffing concerns should be taken into account when considering this home for a loved one.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Illinois
- #130/665
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 28% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 20 points below Illinois's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $47,853 in fines. Lower than most Illinois facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 46 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Illinois. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 27 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Low Staff Turnover (28%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (28%)
20 points below Illinois average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 27 deficiencies on record
Dec 2023
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 F0554
(Tag F0554)
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 a resident was assessed for self administering ...
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
Deficiency F0740
(Tag F0740)
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 identify behaviors, failed to notify the psychiatric n...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
13 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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
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 follow their resident rights policy by failing to allow one residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Deficiency Text Not Available
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure proper grooming for one resident (R322) in a sample of 25 residents reviewed for activities of daily living care.
Findin...
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 ensure proper use of pressure relieving devices. This failure affected one resident (R322) out of 3 reviewed for air mattress p...
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 follow their smoking safety policy, Failed to ensure ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to follow a physician order for fluid restrictions. This failure affected 2 residents (R12, R43) out of 5 reviewed for nutrition c...
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
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to date and change oxygen equipment every 7 days per facility policy and ensure oxygen cannula tubing is placed in a bag when not ...
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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to maintain accurate documentation for 1 resident (R275) of 11 residents who received controlled substances from first floor we...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
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 failed to follow their policy and obtain consent for a psychotropic medication for one...
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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to label open insulin vials for
2 residents (R276, R323) reviewed for medication labels on 1 of 6 medication carts.
Findings i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0813
(Tag F0813)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure resident personal refrigerator temperatures were maintained at 41 degrees Fahrenheit, failed to clean personal refriger...
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 observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to properly clean and sanitize service and dishware. This deficiency has the potential to affect 120 residents receiving food f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policy on garbage disposal by failing to close lids of the dumpster. This deficiency has the potential to affect...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
2 deficiencies
2 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Deficiency Text Not Available
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Deficiency Text Not Available
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
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
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to follow their Administering Medication policy and Reconciliation of Medication on admission policy by not accurately entering the administ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
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 F0561
(Tag F0561)
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 a resident was offered a choice of receiving a h...
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
Deficiency F0567
(Tag F0567)
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 that residents have prompt access to their personal funds upo...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2022
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a resident who smokes with the capability of smoking while residing in the facility. This failure applied to one (R314) of one resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0604
(Tag F0604)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from physical restraints. This failur...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Requirements
(Tag F0622)
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 properly transfer a resident that was experiencing an emergent hosp...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
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 follow their bed-hold policy by failing to provide a resident with ...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly assess and identify a resident for developme...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 facility failed to have a five percent (5%) or lower medication error rate. There were four medication errors out of 27 medication opportunities...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly follow infection control polices by failing to provide source control by staff not wearing proper personal protectiv...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 28% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 20 points below Illinois's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • 27 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $47,853 in fines. Higher than 94% of Illinois facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade C (58/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Citadel Of Glenview,The's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Illinois, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Citadel Of Glenview,The Staffed?
CMS rates CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 28%, compared to the Illinois average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Citadel Of Glenview,The?
State health inspectors documented 27 deficiencies at CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE during 2022 to 2023. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm and 25 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Citadel Of Glenview,The?
CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE 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 CITADEL HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 135 certified beds and approximately 121 residents (about 90% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in GLENVIEW, Illinois.
How Does Citadel Of Glenview,The Compare to Other Illinois Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Illinois, CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (28%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Citadel Of Glenview,The?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the below-average staffing rating.
Is Citadel Of Glenview,The Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Illinois. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Citadel Of Glenview,The Stick Around?
Staff at CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 28%, the facility is 18 percentage points below the Illinois average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly.
Was Citadel Of Glenview,The Ever Fined?
CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE has been fined $47,853 across 1 penalty action. The Illinois average is $33,557. 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 Citadel Of Glenview,The on Any Federal Watch List?
CITADEL OF GLENVIEW,THE 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.