FRIENDSHIP MANOR
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Friendship Manor in Rock Island, Illinois, has a Trust Grade of D, which signifies below average performance with some concerns. It ranks #237 out of 665 facilities in Illinois, placing it in the top half, and #2 out of 9 in Rock Island County, indicating it is one of the better local options. Unfortunately, the facility is currently worsening, with issues increasing from 2 in 2024 to 12 in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength, rated 4/5 stars with a turnover rate of 34%, which is better than the state average; however, RN coverage is concerning, as it is lower than 77% of Illinois facilities. The facility has faced fines of $52,417, which is average, but there have been serious incidents, including a resident falling and fracturing her femur due to unsafe transfer practices, and another resident falling from bed, resulting in a laceration that required staples. While there are strengths in staffing stability, the facility has significant weaknesses that families should consider.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Illinois
- #237/665
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 34% turnover. Near Illinois's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $52,417 in fines. Higher than 84% of Illinois facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- 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
- 17 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (34%)
14 points below Illinois average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Illinois average (2.5)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
12pts below Illinois avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
The Ugly 17 deficiencies on record
Sept 2025
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 1 of 3 residents (R1) was transferred safely. This failure r...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2025
10 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident that required assistance was provided care in a dignified manner for one resident (R225) of 18 reviewed for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
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 include an active mental illness diagnosis during a PASARR (Pre-adm...
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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure restorative services were being provided for one of three residents (R27) reviewed for range of motion in a sample of 35.
Findings ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 perform indwelling urinary catheter care per the facility's policy for one of one residents (R323) reviewed for urinary cathet...
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 a physician order for oxygen use and ensure an oxygen care plan was developed for one resident (R29) reviewed for oxyge...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0745
(Tag F0745)
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 update a plan of care and failed to offer medically re...
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
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to administer a physician ordered antibiotic to a resident with a diagnosis of UTI (Urinary Tract Infection), for one of one resident (R323) re...
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
Based on observation, interview and record review facility staff failed to cleanse a shared blood glucose monitoring machine after use and between residents for two residents (R30 and R43) of two resi...
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 monitor and record cool down temperatures for prepared meats and leftover items that were prepared ahead and stored in the facili...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0947
(Tag F0947)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) completed a minimum of 12 training hours including Dementia training, in a 12-month period. This...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2025
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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident was safely positioned in bed for 1 o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
2 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
3. The admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 6/27/24 documents R18 is cognitively intact, upper body dressing at partial/moderate assistance, lower body dressing at substantial/maximal assistance, an...
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 implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions throughout the facility to protect vulnerable residents and prevent the spread of multi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
3 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 perform catheter care in a clean manner for one resident (R62) of three residents reviewed for catheters in a total sample of 3...
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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to identify an appropriate indication for use of an antips...
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 store food items in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility refrigerator by not discardi...
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
- • 34% turnover. Below Illinois's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 3 harm violation(s), $52,417 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 17 deficiencies on record, including 3 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $52,417 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Illinois. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade D (40/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Friendship Manor's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns FRIENDSHIP MANOR 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 Friendship Manor Staffed?
CMS rates FRIENDSHIP MANOR's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 34%, compared to the Illinois average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Friendship Manor?
State health inspectors documented 17 deficiencies at FRIENDSHIP MANOR during 2023 to 2025. These included: 3 that caused actual resident harm, 13 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Friendship Manor?
FRIENDSHIP MANOR 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 94 certified beds and approximately 75 residents (about 80% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in ROCK ISLAND, Illinois.
How Does Friendship Manor Compare to Other Illinois Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Illinois, FRIENDSHIP MANOR's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (34%) 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 Friendship Manor?
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 Friendship Manor Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, FRIENDSHIP MANOR 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 Friendship Manor Stick Around?
FRIENDSHIP MANOR has a staff turnover rate of 34%, 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 Friendship Manor Ever Fined?
FRIENDSHIP MANOR has been fined $52,417 across 3 penalty actions. This is above the Illinois average of $33,603. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.
Is Friendship Manor on Any Federal Watch List?
FRIENDSHIP MANOR 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.