VALLEY HI NURSING HOME
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Valley Hi Nursing Home has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about its care quality. It ranks #293 out of 665 facilities in Illinois, placing it in the top half but still reflecting serious issues. The facility's trend is worsening, with reported problems increasing from 5 in 2023 to 15 in 2024. Staffing is a notable strength, with a perfect score of 5/5 and a turnover rate of 38%, which is better than the state average. However, it has been fined $65,556, which is average but still raises concerns about compliance. Specific incidents of concern include a resident with swallowing difficulties being left with improper food and drink choices that could lead to aspiration risks, and the facility failing to properly label and discard expired medications, affecting several residents. Additionally, there were lapses in vaccination documentation for some residents, suggesting potential oversights in preventive care. While staffing is strong, these weaknesses in care practices could be concerning for families considering this home for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Illinois
- #293/665
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 38% turnover. Near Illinois's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $65,556 in fines. Lower than most Illinois facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 72 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Illinois nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 28 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (38%)
10 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
Near Illinois avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
The Ugly 28 deficiencies on record
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
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to resolve a grievance/concern verbalized by a resident's POA (power of attorney) for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for grievances in the samp...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
14 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 5. R9's Speech Therapy Evaluation and Plan of Treatment dated 3/15/24 states, Patient referred to SLP (speech language pathologi...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a non-pressure sacral wound was treated, as ordered, for 1 of 5 residents (R370) reviewed for non-pressure wounds in t...
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 ensure a catheter drainage bag was maintained below the level of the bladder for 1 of 1 residents (R49) reviewed for catheters...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility staff failed to ensure a resident took all medications during me...
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 ensure PRN (as needed) anti-anxiety (psychotropic) medications had a duration/end date. This applies to 2 of 5 (R53, R63) reviewed for unnec...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to serve pureed barbecue beef brisket at safe temperatures. This applies to 3 of 3 residents (R46, R28, R10) reviewed for pureed ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pureed barbecue beef brisket in a smooth, pudding-like consistency for residents requiring a pureed diet. This applies...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0825
(Tag F0825)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to evaluate a resident for Physical Therapy (PT) after receiving an order to start PT for 1 of 5 residents (R17) reviewed for rehab/therapy in...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0847
(Tag F0847)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the facility's binding arbitration agreement was explained to a resident in a form and manner that the resident could understand for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
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 screen for and administer influenza (flu) and pneumococcal immunizat...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
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 resident care equipment was in safe working order. This appli...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0940
(Tag F0940)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to provide mechanical lift training to facility staff using lifts for resident's requiring mechanical lifts for transfers. This applies to 1 o...
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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure opened, multi-dose vials of medication, including inhalers and gels, were labeled with expiration dates. The facility fa...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0887
(Tag F0887)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to screen for and offer the COVID-19 immunization to residents for 4 of...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0602
(Tag F0602)
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 prevent the theft of $40 from a resident's wallet. Thi...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to report to the local health department and local law enf...
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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to identify allegations of theft as being allegations of ...
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 follow physician orders by administering insulin to a ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. On [DATE] at 10:44 AM, inside of the medication cart there was a urinary catheter insertion tray with an expiration date of 0...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2022
8 deficiencies
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to identify, report, and assess a new open wound and the...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide peri-care in a manner to prevent urinary tract...
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** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure interventions to prevent weight loss were impl...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to act upon the pharmacist's recommendation made on a monthly medication regimen review for two consecutive months for 1 of 5 residents (R53) ...
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 ensure PRN (as needed) anti-anxiety (psychotropic) medication had a duration/end date for 1 of 5 residents (R44) reviewed for unnecessary m...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to dispose of an expired multi-dose medication vial and failed to label the multi dose vial with the correct expiration date for...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. On 01/24/22 at 11:27 AM V7, CNA, was observed bringing R25 from the bathroom to her wheelchair via a sit to stand (mechanical...
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
2. On 1/24/22 at 1:03 PM, V10 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) performed incontinence care to R42's front peri area, turned R42 to her side, and proceeded to clean a moderate amount of stool from R42...
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
- • 38% turnover. Below Illinois's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), $65,556 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 28 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $65,556 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Illinois. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (38/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Valley Hi's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns VALLEY HI NURSING 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 Valley Hi Staffed?
CMS rates VALLEY HI NURSING HOME's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 38%, compared to the Illinois average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Valley Hi?
State health inspectors documented 28 deficiencies at VALLEY HI NURSING HOME during 2022 to 2024. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 27 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 Valley Hi?
VALLEY HI NURSING HOME is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 128 certified beds and approximately 82 residents (about 64% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in WOODSTOCK, Illinois.
How Does Valley Hi Compare to Other Illinois Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Illinois, VALLEY HI NURSING HOME's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (38%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Valley Hi?
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 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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Valley Hi Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, VALLEY HI NURSING HOME has documented safety concerns. 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 Valley Hi Stick Around?
VALLEY HI NURSING HOME has a staff turnover rate of 38%, 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 Valley Hi Ever Fined?
VALLEY HI NURSING HOME has been fined $65,556 across 1 penalty action. This is above the Illinois average of $33,734. 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 Valley Hi on Any Federal Watch List?
VALLEY HI 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.