WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided, which places it in the poor range. Ranking #419 out of 665 facilities in Illinois means it is in the bottom half, with no other options in Greene County. The facility is worsening, with reported issues increasing from 6 to 8 in the past year. Staffing is a mixed bag, rated 3 out of 5 stars, but with a troubling turnover rate of 59%, significantly higher than the state average. While there have been no fines, the RN coverage is concerning, as it is lower than 92% of Illinois facilities, which can impact residents' safety. Specific incidents included a serious failure to provide a resident with a therapeutic diet, resulting in choking, and a lack of proper documentation of RN coverage during shifts. There were also shortcomings in infection control measures during the COVID pandemic, potentially affecting all residents. Overall, while there are some strengths, such as no fines, the weaknesses highlighted by the inspector findings raise serious concerns for families considering this facility.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Illinois
- #419/665
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 59% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Illinois facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 19 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Illinois. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 19 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
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Illinois average (2.5)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
13pts above Illinois avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
11 points above Illinois average of 48%
The Ugly 19 deficiencies on record
Oct 2024
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to coordinate services between the facility and resident's oncology provider for one of one resident (R3) reviewed for coordination of service...
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 F0773
(Tag F0773)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Oncologist and the Attending Physician were notified of a significant lab value for 1 of 8 residents (R3) reviewed for reporting...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2024
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, observations, and record reviews the facility failed to evaluate, monitor, and prevent a physical altercati...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to administer medications as prescribed by the ordering ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
3. R12's physician order, dated 9/9/2024 documented, Macrobid Oral Capsule 100 MG (Nitrofurantoin Monohyd Macro) Give 1 capsule by mouth two times a day related to URINARY TRACT INFECTION (UTI), SITE ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have an effective antibiotic stewardship program to monitor and track antibiotic use and infections in the facility for 4 of 4 (R12, R46, R...
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 a Registered Nurse (RN) for a least 8 consecutive hours a day for 7 days a week. This failure has the potential to affect all 106 re...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0912
(Tag F0912)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide 80 square feet of floor space per resident in eight, 3-bed resident rooms for 23 of 23 residents (R2, R15, R20, R23, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
5 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, observation, and record review, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the Administrator immediately for 2 residents (R18, R36) reviewed for abuse in the sample of...
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 complete injury report, investigate an injury, and im...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to prevent resident to resident abuse for 5 of 22 reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to place a date on vial when a multi-use medication vial was opened, failed to maintain the medication refrigerator at the prope...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0912
(Tag F0912)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide 80 square feet of floor space per resident in eight, 3-bed resident rooms for 24 of 24 residents (R6, R9, R12, R13, R...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
1 deficiency
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
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement broad based testing or contact tracing and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2022
5 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
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 provide diet as ordered for 1 of 1 resident(R6) reviewe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
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 thoroughly investigate an allegation of abuse for 1 of 1 resident (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain labs to monitor the efficacy of anticoagulant therapy and monitor need for dosage adjustments for 2 of 3 residents (R63, R99) review...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their Antibiotic Stewardship Program to monitor the use of antibiotics for 5 of 5 residents (R8, R21, R43, R50, R66) reviewed for...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0912
(Tag F0912)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the failed to provide 80 square feet of floor space per resident in eight, 3...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "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.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 1 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 19 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • Grade F (30/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 59% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center Staffed?
CMS rates WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 59%, which is 13 percentage points above the Illinois average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center?
State health inspectors documented 19 deficiencies at WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER during 2022 to 2024. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm, 15 with potential for harm, and 3 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center?
WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER 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 NORBERT BENNETT & DONALD DENZ, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 119 certified beds and approximately 90 residents (about 76% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in WHITE HALL, Illinois.
How Does White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center Compare to Other Illinois Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Illinois, WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (59%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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 substantiated abuse finding on record and the facility's high staff turnover rate.
Is White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). The facility has a 2-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 White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center Stick Around?
Staff turnover at WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER is high. At 59%, the facility is 13 percentage points above the Illinois average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center Ever Fined?
WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER 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 White Hall Nursing & Rehab Center on Any Federal Watch List?
WHITE HALL NURSING & REHAB CENTER 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.