ALLURE OF MENDOTA
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Allure of Mendota has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranking #211 out of 665 facilities in Illinois places it in the top half, and it ranks #6 out of 9 in La Salle County, meaning only two local options are better. The facility is improving, with issues decreasing from 7 in 2024 to 2 in 2025, but it still faces serious concerns, including four incidents that caused harm to residents. Staffing is relatively stable with a turnover rate of 31%, which is below the state average, and RN coverage is average, suggesting some consistency in care. However, the facility has been fined $28,259, which is concerning, and there are serious incidents such as residents suffering fractures from improper transfers and a failure to communicate changes in condition, highlighting areas that still need urgent attention.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Illinois
- #211/665
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 31% turnover. Near Illinois's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $28,259 in fines. Lower than most Illinois facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 44 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Illinois. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 23 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 (31%)
17 points below Illinois average of 48%
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Near Illinois average (2.5)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
15pts below Illinois avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 23 deficiencies on record
May 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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
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 report an injury of unknown origin to Illinois Department of Public ...
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
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
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 thorough investigation was done by interviewing additional ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 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
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
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 verify a resident's code status prior to starting CPR/Cardio-Pulmon...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2024
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's indwelling urinary catheter bag included a privacy cover and the catheter tubing was off the floor for on...
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 ensure medications were administered according to physician orders and medication instructions for two (R6 and R56) of seven ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2024
3 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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed perform assessments, failed to continue to monitor a resi...
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · 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 safely perform a mechanical lift transfer and failed t...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide sufficient staffing to meet resident's needs. This has the p...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2024
1 deficiency
1 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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure safe resident transfers for two (R1 and R2) of three residents reviewed for falls with transfers in a sample of three. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
10 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** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to implement pressure ulcer prevention interventions for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assist with a resident's need for toileting in a timely manner for one (R5) of 18 residents reviewed for resident rights in a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to revise resident Care Plans for two (R17 and R59) of 18 residents reviewed for Care Plans in a sample of 24.
Findings include:...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a physician ordered assistive device was used for a resident's contracted hand for one (R36) of one resident reviewed ...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. R366's current Face sheet documents R366 admitted to the facility on [DATE].
R366's Weights and Vitals Summary documents weig...
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 follow its oxygen policy for changing oxygen equipment and failed to ensure a resident's oxygen humidity bottle was not empty...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to assess a dialysis access site; failed to monitor a dialysis resident's weight per physician order; and failed to ensure commun...
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 ensure physician ordered medications were administered...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
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 perform hand hygiene prior to exiting a positive COVID...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0882
(Tag F0882)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the designated Infection Control Preventionist completed the specialized training in infection prevention and control. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2022
4 deficiencies
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to use a gait belt while transferring a dependent resident for one of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0744
(Tag F0744)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
2. R13's Physician Order Sheet, dated 9/21/2022, documents, Psychotic Disturbances,
Avascular Dementia, Anxiety, and Unspecified Behavioral Syndrome.
R13's current Care Plan, dated 9/21/2022, documen...
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
3. R38's Physician's Order Sheet dated, 9/21/2022, documents Geodon (antipsychotic) 40MG (milligram) twice daily for Psychosis/Delusions and Hallucinations, Buspirone Tablet 10MG (milligrams) for Anxi...
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 ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) worked eight hours a day seven days a week. This has the potential to affect all 67 residents residing in th...
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
- • 31% turnover. Below Illinois's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 4 harm violation(s), $28,259 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 23 deficiencies on record, including 4 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $28,259 in fines. Higher than 94% of Illinois facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade F (35/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Allure Of Mendota's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns ALLURE OF MENDOTA 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 Allure Of Mendota Staffed?
CMS rates ALLURE OF MENDOTA's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 31%, compared to the Illinois average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Allure Of Mendota?
State health inspectors documented 23 deficiencies at ALLURE OF MENDOTA during 2022 to 2025. These included: 4 that caused actual resident harm and 19 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Allure Of Mendota?
ALLURE OF MENDOTA 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 ALLURE HEALTHCARE SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 85 certified beds and approximately 64 residents (about 75% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in MENDOTA, Illinois.
How Does Allure Of Mendota Compare to Other Illinois Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Illinois, ALLURE OF MENDOTA's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (31%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Allure Of Mendota?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"
Is Allure Of Mendota Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, ALLURE OF MENDOTA 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 3-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 Allure Of Mendota Stick Around?
ALLURE OF MENDOTA has a staff turnover rate of 31%, 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 Allure Of Mendota Ever Fined?
ALLURE OF MENDOTA has been fined $28,259 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Illinois average of $33,361. 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 Allure Of Mendota on Any Federal Watch List?
ALLURE OF MENDOTA 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.