MASON CITY AREA NURSING HOME
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Mason City Area Nursing Home has received a Trust Grade of F, which indicates significant concerns about the quality of care provided. It ranks #577 out of 665 facilities in Illinois, placing it in the bottom half, and is the second lowest option in Mason County. While the facility's issues have decreased from 10 in 2024 to 4 in 2025, the trend is still concerning given the number of critical and serious deficiencies found. Staffing is somewhat of a strength with a 2/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 44%, which is slightly better than the state average. However, specific incidents raised serious alarms, including a resident sustaining second-degree burns due to hot coffee dispensers not being monitored properly, and two residents being physically restrained without proper justification or consent, which caused them humiliation and distress. Overall, families should weigh these significant risks against the facility's strengths before making a decision.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Illinois
- #577/665
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 44% turnover. Near Illinois's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Illinois facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 33 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Illinois. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 16 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
-
Staff turnover below average (44%)
4 points below Illinois average of 48%
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Illinois average (2.5)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near Illinois avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 16 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
1 deficiency
1 IJ (1 facility-wide)
CRITICAL
(L)
📢 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 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 implement individualized care planned interventions to...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2025
3 deficiencies
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
Deficiency F0604
(Tag F0604)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review and observation, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary physical r...
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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to immediately report inappropriate use of a physical restraint to the facility's Abuse Coordinator for two of 12 residents (R1, R2) reviewed f...
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 F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) worked at least eight hours daily. This failure has the potential to affect all 56 residents residing within ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions while performing wound care, perineal care, and hand hygiene for one of three residents (R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 5. R39's current Physician's Orders document the following medication orders: Seroquel (antipsychotic medication) 75 milligrams ...
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 have a Registered Nurse for eight consecutive hours in a 24-hour period on four of 30 days per the Facility's November Nursing Schedule, an...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2024
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the Facility failed to ensure a resident's allegation of staff abuse was reported to the Abuse Coordinator for one (R22) of 14 Residents reviewed for Abuse in a s...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
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 provide transfer/discharge notification, to the Ombudsman, for one ...
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 notify R11 or R11's representative of the facilities bed-hold in wr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0675
(Tag F0675)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have physician's orders, for adaptive equipment, for one resident (R1) of 29 residents reviewed for physician's orders in a s...
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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement appropriate interventions to prevent two falls out of bed for one (R46) of six residents reviewed for falls in a sample of 29.
Fi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0576
(Tag F0576)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure mail was delivered on Saturdays. This failure has the potential to affect all 57 residents who reside in the facility.
Findings inclu...
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 the services of a registered nurse eight hours a day, seven days a week. This failure has the potential to affect all 57 residents ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2022
2 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. R49's Ulcer/Wound documentation dated 8/10/2022, documents Right Iliac crest (rear) Length 0.5 x 0.5 x 0 depth. Stage N/A (no...
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 interview and record review the facility failed to notify the physician for one resident (R25) reviewed for physician notification out of a sample of 20.
Findings include:
The Resident Care P...
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
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Illinois facilities.
- • 44% turnover. Below Illinois's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 16 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • Grade F (16/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Mason City Area's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns MASON CITY AREA NURSING HOME an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Mason City Area Staffed?
CMS rates MASON CITY AREA NURSING HOME's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 44%, compared to the Illinois average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Mason City Area?
State health inspectors documented 16 deficiencies at MASON CITY AREA NURSING HOME during 2022 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 13 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 Mason City Area?
MASON CITY AREA NURSING HOME is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by HERITAGE OPERATIONS GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 66 certified beds and approximately 58 residents (about 88% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in MASON CITY, Illinois.
How Does Mason City Area Compare to Other Illinois Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Illinois, MASON CITY AREA NURSING HOME's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (44%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Mason City Area?
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 Mason City Area Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, MASON CITY AREA NURSING HOME has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-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 Mason City Area Stick Around?
MASON CITY AREA NURSING HOME has a staff turnover rate of 44%, 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 Mason City Area Ever Fined?
MASON CITY AREA NURSING HOME has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Mason City Area on Any Federal Watch List?
MASON CITY AREA 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.