PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER HOME
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Pleasant View Luther Home has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns regarding their care and operations. With a state rank of #276 out of 665 facilities in Illinois, they are in the top half, but it's important to note that they rank #7 out of 9 in La Salle County, suggesting limited options for families. The facility's trend is worsening, as issues increased from 11 in 2024 to 16 in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength, with a rating of 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 36%, which is below the state average. However, the facility has faced serious incidents, including a critical failure to protect a resident from sexual abuse, leading to significant trauma, and another incident where a resident suffered a neck fracture after tripping over a wheelchair due to a lack of safety precautions. Overall, while there are some strengths in staffing, the facility has concerning deficiencies that families should carefully consider.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Illinois
- #276/665
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 36% turnover. Near Illinois's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $103,907 in fines. Higher than 53% of Illinois facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 48 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Illinois. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 39 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (36%)
12 points below Illinois average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Illinois average (2.5)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
10pts below Illinois avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
The Ugly 39 deficiencies on record
Jun 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
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 follow the recommended guidelines to properly treat an...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2025
4 deficiencies
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to identify environmental hazards and implement fall preve...
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
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to notify a resident's representative of a change on resident's anti depressant medication to 1 of 5 residents (R2) reviewed for notification o...
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
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to notify a resolution of a grievance to 1 of 5 residents (R2) reviewed for grievances in the sample of 5.
Findings include:
On 5/6/25 at 1:30 ...
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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
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 incontinence care to a resident that need extensive assist w...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2025
11 deficiencies
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 perform hand hygiene, glove changes and perform pressure ulcer dressing change in a manner to prevent cross contamination for ...
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 ensure oxygen tubing and humidifier bottles were dated and changed per policy for two (R25 and R127) of four residents reviewe...
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 F0710
(Tag F0710)
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 Hospice providers provided the facility with written physici...
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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document clinical rationale for extending PRN (as needed) psychotropic medication for one (R6) of two residents reviewed for psychotropic m...
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 F0849
(Tag F0849)
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 the Hospice's coordinated communication and required documen...
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 F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure facility staff were educated and competent in providing Hospice and End of Life Care for Hospice Residents for nine of nine resident...
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 the staff completely covered hair in a sanitary manner while in the kitchen; failed to ensure food items were stored a...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0574
(Tag F0574)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the facility Ombudsman posting was visible to residents residing on the second, third, and fourth floors of the facilit...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0577
(Tag F0577)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the facility's Survey Binder included all prior survey results conducted by the State Agency and was easily accessible ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
2. R31's Progress Notes, dated 2/8/25, documents R31 was transferred to the local hospital after a fall with injury. There is no documentation indicating that R31 or R31's representative was given wri...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
2. R31's Progress Notes, dated 2/5/25, documents R31 was transferred to the local hospital after a fall with injury. There is no documentation indicating that R31 or R31's representative was given a c...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · 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 demented resident (R1) from sexual abuse by ...
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
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
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 their abuse prevention program to screen, pr...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to identify and report a potential allegation of residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident safety during assisted ambulation for one (R1) resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 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
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 allegations of Employee to Resident Physical Abuse to the Administrator/Abuse Coordinator for one (R1) resident reviewed...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2024
5 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 interview, observation and record review, the facility failed to perform skin risk assessments, implement additional pr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on Observation, Interview and Record Review, the facility failed to answer a resident's call light in a timely manner for one of one resident (R34) reviewed for accommodation of needs in the sam...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. R53's current Physician Order Sheet, dated 1/31/24, documents R53 has an order for Oxygen at four liters per minute, via nasal cannula, continuously to maintain Oxygen saturation of greater than 90...
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
2. On 1/30/24 at 10:20 AM, R53 was in his room laying in bed. R53 lifted his left arm with his right hand to show his dialysis port and stated he cannot move it on it's own. R53's left lower extremity...
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
3. On 1/29/24 at 11:15 AM, R34 was sitting in her room interacting with and being cared for by V7 (Registered Nurse) and V8 (Registered Nurse). R34 was somewhat confused with conversation. R34 was not...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident safety during van transport for one (R1) of four re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2022
12 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
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 use proper transfer technique, identify root cause, an...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to investigate and document facility grievances with resolution for two (R3 and R19) of two residents reviewed for Grievances in the sample of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to fully develop baseline Care Plans for two (R65 and R229) of 18 residents reviewed for Care Plans in a sample of 27.
Findings include:
The ...
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
3) Current Physician's Order Summary indicates R44 was admitted to the facility 6/28/21 with diagnoses including Castleman's Disease and Lymphedema.
On 11/1/22 at 10:15am R44 was in bed, both legs and...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were well-groomed for two (R65 and R2...
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 provide pressure relieving interventions for one resident (R12) with unstageable pressure wounds to both heels of three residen...
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 that facility failed to ensure daily weights were obtained for a dialysis resident as per physician order for one (R65) of one resident reviewed for d...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure narcotics were signed out immediately after administered for one (R19) of seven residents reviewed for Medication Admi...
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
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to have an appropriate indication for use/diagnosis, failed to identify specific behaviors to monitor, and failed to obtain consen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident call devices were within reach and answered timely for five (R3, R10, R19, R32, and R230) of 18 residents rev...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to fully develop resident Comprehensive Care Plans for six (R3, R12, R19, R27, R30, and R32) of 18 residents reviewed for Care Plans in a sampl...
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 chemical dishwasher sanitization test strips were not expired, failed to dry dishes before stacking and failed to pre-cl...
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
- • 36% turnover. Below Illinois's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 1 life-threatening violation(s), 5 harm violation(s), $103,907 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 39 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $103,907 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Illinois. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Pleasant View Luther Home's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER 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 Pleasant View Luther Home Staffed?
CMS rates PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER HOME's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 36%, compared to the Illinois average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Pleasant View Luther Home?
State health inspectors documented 39 deficiencies at PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER HOME during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 5 that caused actual resident harm, 29 with potential for harm, and 4 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 Pleasant View Luther Home?
PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER 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 90 certified beds and approximately 69 residents (about 77% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in OTTAWA, Illinois.
How Does Pleasant View Luther Home Compare to Other Illinois Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Illinois, PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER HOME's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (36%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Pleasant View Luther Home?
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 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 substantiated abuse finding on record.
Is Pleasant View Luther Home Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER HOME 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 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 Pleasant View Luther Home Stick Around?
PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER HOME has a staff turnover rate of 36%, 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 Pleasant View Luther Home Ever Fined?
PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER HOME has been fined $103,907 across 4 penalty actions. This is 3.0x the Illinois average of $34,118. 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 Pleasant View Luther Home on Any Federal Watch List?
PLEASANT VIEW LUTHER 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.