Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around October 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Hegg Memorial Health Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Food handling practices failed to follow professional standards during meal service. A dietary staff member placed a serving scoop on a contaminated counter and then used it to portion food, and a Hostess wore gloves while handling a bun, tray, and hamburger during lunch service. The CDM stated gloves should be used for a single purpose and not touch anything besides the intended food item, and facility policy required glove changes after touching contaminated surfaces and proper cleaning of food-contact surfaces and utensils.
Bed hold notices for two residents were incomplete when they transferred to the hospital. The notices documented verbal authorization from a representative, but they were not signed by the resident or representative and did not state the daily amount agreed to be paid. One resident had short-term hospital stays for SOB and edema, and the other had a BIMS of 0 and was hospitalized for UTI/sepsis and seizure evaluation.
A facility failed to serve the correct amount of minced/moist meat to residents ordered IDDSI diets. Three residents with varying cognitive status were affected when a hostess used a 3 oz green scoop instead of the required black handled/#8 scoop for ham, and the CDM confirmed the residents did not receive the appropriate amount. The DON and RD stated the correct scoop size should have been used, and the menu document specified the larger portion for minced/moist or mechanical soft meats.
A resident with severe cognitive deficits and total dependence on staff for transfers was inappropriately transferred using a sling two sizes larger than recommended. The resident, who had a significant health decline and was admitted to hospice, was inadequately supported during transfers, leading to bruising and a skin tear. Staff failed to notify a nurse for assessment, and the facility lacked a specific assessment form for sling size determination.
Food Handling and Cross-Contamination During Meal Service
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prepare food in accordance with professional standards during meal service by not completing appropriate hand hygiene and by placing serving utensils on contaminated surfaces and then using them. During a continuous observation, Staff A processed pureed ham and pureed asparagus, handled metal steam table containers, and placed a green-handled scoop on the metal counter where the containers had previously been placed before using that same scoop to measure asparagus into the containers. The facility reported a census of 58 residents. During lunch service, Staff B, the Hostess, applied gloves, lifted a lunch tray with the left hand, obtained a hamburger bun from a bag on the tray, used both gloved hands to remove the bun from the bag and separate it, then used tongs to obtain a hamburger from the steam table and used the right hand to place the bun on top of the hamburger before removing the gloves. The Certified Dietary Manager stated she would expect gloves to be used for a single use and not touch anything besides the intended food item to prevent cross contamination, and that a barrier should be used when utensils are placed on a contaminated surface. Facility policies stated gloves are to be changed anytime a contaminated surface is touched and that all foods, surfaces, utensils, and equipment that come in contact with food shall be washed, rinsed, sanitized, and air dried after each use.
Bed Hold Notices Missing Required Signatures and Daily Payment Amounts
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure bed hold notices were signed by residents or their responsible persons when residents transferred out of the facility, and the notices also did not include the amount per day the resident or representative agreed to pay for 2 of 2 residents reviewed. For Resident #1, the clinical record showed two hospital transfers for short-term stays, including one for shortness of breath and another for shortness of breath with edema. The bed hold notices for both transfers documented verbal authorization from the resident’s representative, but neither notice contained a resident or representative signature, and neither notice listed the daily amount agreed to be paid. For Resident #8, the MDS documented a BIMS score of 0, indicating the resident was rarely or never understood. The clinical census and progress notes showed two hospital transfers, including one for urinary tract infection/sepsis and another for seizure evaluation/treatment. The bed hold notices for both transfers documented verbal authorization from the resident’s representative, but neither notice contained a resident or representative signature, and neither notice listed the amount per day the resident or representative agreed to pay. When asked for a bed hold policy, the facility did not provide one.
Incorrect Meat Portioning for IDDSI Diets
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow the menu and prepare food to meet residents’ nutritional needs by not serving the correct amount of minced/moist meat to residents on IDDSI level 5 diets. Resident #41 had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS of 7 and was ordered a regular diet with IDDSI 6 meat. Resident #43 had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS of 5 and was ordered a regular diet with minced/moist meats. Resident #52 had a BIMS of 15 and was also ordered a regular diet with minced/moist meats. These residents were among 3 of 3 reviewed who were affected by the meat portioning issue. During observation, Staff A processed 8 servings of ham and measured the minced/moist meat into 4 cups, and Staff A stated that 4 cups divided between 8 servings would equal a #8 scoop. A written meal document indicated the minced/moist or mechanical soft diets were to receive the black handled/#8 scoop. However, during lunch service Staff B served Residents #41, #43, and #52 minced/moist ham using a 3 oz green handle scoop. Staff B later requested a serving of pureed meat, and Staff C, the CDM, confirmed the green scoop had been used and stated the black handled 4 oz scoop should have been used. Staff C acknowledged the residents did not receive the appropriate amount. The DON stated the appropriate serving size scoop should have been used, and the RD stated she would expect the correct scoop size to be used and that all IDDSI 5 and IDDSI 6 diets should have received minced/moist meat because ham is not as soft as other meats.
Inappropriate Sling Use for Resident Transfer
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure safe transfer techniques for a resident who required the use of a mechanical lift. The resident, who had a severe cognitive deficit and was totally dependent on staff for transfers, was transferred using a sling that was two sizes larger than recommended for her weight. This inappropriate use of equipment led to the resident being inadequately supported during transfers, with her weight resting on her armpits and the back of her knees, causing discomfort and potential injury. The resident, who had a significant decline in health and was admitted to hospice services, was observed with her head hanging down and not responding during transfers. Staff used a toileting sling that was not suitable for her condition, as she was unable to sit up and was mostly incontinent. The sling's padding, meant to support the arms, was misaligned, and the resident's body was not adequately protected during the transfer, leading to bruising and a skin tear. The facility's staff did not notify a nurse for a complete assessment when they noticed the resident's decline, which could have prevented the inappropriate use of the sling. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that there was no specific assessment form for determining the appropriate sling size, and the staff relied on a sling chart with weights. The facility's policy emphasized the importance of using proper equipment and techniques to prevent injury, but this was not adhered to in this case.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 87 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Rock Valley
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pleasant Acres Care Center | 7.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 14 | 0 |
| Fellowship Village | 10.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| Crown Pointe Estates Care Center | 11.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Lyon Specialty Care | 16 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Hillcrest Health Care Center | 16.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 30 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Hegg Memorial Health Center.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.