Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around September 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 La Bella Of Caseyville during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment, aphasia, CVA, and multiple chronic conditions had a documented POA refusal for a COVID vaccine, yet the vaccine was entered on the MAR and administered anyway. Staff later noted the refusal in the record after the dose had already been given, and the POA questioned why the vaccine was administered and reported prior adverse reactions after a previous COVID shot.
A resident’s mattress was observed with a sticky splatter and a white pasty-like substance on the head and side of the mattress. The resident, who was cognitively intact and needed ADL assistance, said staff dropped her soda into the trash can next to her bed and it splattered onto the mattress. The ADM and DON stated they would expect housekeeping or CNA staff to clean the mattress if something was spilled on it.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment, aphasia, CVA, DM, CHF, and other chronic conditions had a COVID vaccine refusal documented by the POA, but a COVID vaccine order was entered and the vaccine was later administered anyway. The MAR/TAR and progress note documented the vaccine was given, while the DON and ADON/IP stated the wrong order was placed despite the refusal consent being available.
A resident with COPD and chronic respiratory failure, normally alert, sociable, and eating 75–100% of meals, became withdrawn over several days, stayed in her room, refused meals, reported feeling unwell, and received multiple PRN medications for cough, congestion, allergies, and pain. CNAs repeatedly reported that the resident was not at baseline, was staying in bed, refusing to eat, later developed nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and new incontinence, and appeared drained and ashy in color. LPNs documented limited vital signs and PRN administrations but did not complete or document comprehensive assessments, did not consistently obtain full vitals including O2 saturation in response to respiratory symptoms, and did not notify the NP or physician of the resident’s change in condition. Only after another LPN and CNA raised concerns did the NP assess the resident, document fatigue, weakness, altered mental status, diarrhea, ashen/grey skin, poor intake, and that she was not at baseline, and arrange transfer to the ER, where the resident was admitted with RSV. The facility’s own policy required immediate assessment, full vitals, and provider notification for acute changes in condition, which were not followed in this case.
Multiple residents at high risk for falls experienced repeated unwitnessed falls resulting in injuries, as staff failed to consistently implement or update accident prevention interventions such as anti-slip devices, signage, and alarms. Care plans and fall risk assessments identified the need for these interventions, but observations and staff interviews revealed they were not reliably in place or known to staff, and new interventions were not added after changes in condition or additional falls.
The facility did not ensure an RN was on duty for at least eight hours per day on several occasions, with staffing records showing only LPNs and CNAs present during required RN shifts. The administrator acknowledged insufficient RN staffing, impacting all residents in the facility.
Three residents did not receive the required ABN and NOMNC forms when their Medicare Part A skilled services ended, as the responsible social worker was unaware of the need to issue both notices. In some cases, the NOMNC was provided after the end of coverage rather than in advance, contrary to facility policy.
The facility failed to prevent abuse in two residents, leading to one feeling scared and unsafe. One resident reported being grabbed by another, while another experienced verbal abuse from an agency CNA. The facility's abuse prevention policy was not effectively implemented, as evidenced by inadequate intervention and unaddressed aggressive behaviors.
The facility failed to administer oxygen therapy as prescribed and did not provide necessary signage for residents receiving oxygen therapy. A resident with COPD and Respiratory Failure was without an 'oxygen in use' sign and had an empty portable oxygen tank during lunch. Another resident with COPD had an oxygen concentrator with dusty filters and no humidification bottle. The facility's policy requires equipment to be in good working order, including signage.
A resident experienced a delay in receiving a stool DNA test kit due to the facility's failure to coordinate care and deliver mail promptly. The resident, who needed the test for a follow-up appointment, was upset by the delay. The facility staff did not effectively communicate or verify new medical orders, leading to a breakdown in care coordination.
The facility's infection control program was found lacking, with incomplete documentation of infection data, affecting all 88 residents. The infection control log and book were missing crucial information, such as dates and organisms. The Assistant DON, new to the role, admitted the surveillance and infection control processes were not up to standard.
The facility failed to respond to call lights in a timely manner, affecting several residents who reported average wait times of 30 minutes or more. Despite varying cognitive abilities, residents consistently experienced delays, which were discussed in resident council meetings and documented in grievances. The administrator acknowledged the issue but lacked a clear policy or recent audit results to address it, and the ombudsman confirmed ongoing complaints from residents and families.
The facility failed to manage resident clothing effectively, leading to missing laundry for several residents. Residents reported ongoing issues with lost clothing that was not found or replaced, and the facility's policy on discarding unclaimed clothing was not documented in the admission contract. The ombudsman noted numerous complaints, and observations revealed boxes of unlabeled clothing, highlighting a deficiency in maintaining a comfortable living environment.
The facility failed to prevent abuse among residents, with incidents involving resident-to-resident altercations. A resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of substance abuse was involved in multiple altercations, including punching another resident. Another incident involved a cognitively intact resident in a physical altercation with a severely impaired resident who wandered into their room. Despite the facility's abuse prevention policy, these incidents indicate a deficiency in protecting residents from abuse.
The facility failed to ensure correct antibiotic use for two residents with UTIs, as no Culture and Sensitivity reports were available to confirm the appropriateness of the prescribed antibiotics. The newly hired Infection Control Preventionist acknowledged gaps in surveillance and infection control processes, contributing to the deficiency.
COVID Vaccine Given Despite Documented Refusal
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a resident’s right to refuse a vaccination when a COVID-19 vaccine was administered to a resident whose record documented a refusal by the resident’s POA. The resident had multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, type 2 DM, CVA with hemiplegia and hemiparesis, dysphagia, aphasia, dementia, epilepsy, CHF, cardiomyopathy, HTN, and ASHD. The resident’s care plan and MDS documented severe cognitive impairment, impaired communication, and need for assistance with ADLs. The resident’s immunization record documented refusal of the COVID vaccination, and the physician order and MAR/TAR documented the vaccine was ordered and then given. The MAR/TAR showed the vaccine was administered on 3/28/26, and progress notes documented that the vaccine was given and later entered into the immunization record after staff noted the POA refusal. One progress note stated that upon attempting to enter the vaccine into the electronic record, the POA refusal was noted, and the ADON, DON, NP, and a family member were notified. The resident’s POA later questioned why the vaccine had been given and expressed concern about the manufacturer and possible adverse effects. Another progress note documented the POA reporting that the resident had previously had a change in condition, high fevers, and lethargy after a prior COVID vaccination and had been treated in the hospital. The resident was noted to be lethargic, weak, unable to stand to bear weight, and visibly shaking, with a temperature of 100.2, and the POA requested hospital transfer. Interviews with the DON, ADON, nurses, and NP confirmed that the refusal had been documented, the wrong order was entered, and the vaccine was administered despite the refusal.
Soiled Mattress Left Uncleaned in Resident Room
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for one resident when R4’s mattress was observed with an area on the head and side that was sticky to the touch and appeared to have something splattered on it, with a white pasty-like substance seen under the splatter area. The observation was made during a survey review of the resident’s room environment. R4’s record showed an admission date of 11/7/25 and diagnoses including Parkinson’s Disease with dyskinesia, morbid obesity, and hypertension. Her MDS documented that she was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, required assistance with ADLs, and was incontinent of bowel and bladder. R4 stated that two days earlier, while staff were opening a soda for her, it was dropped into the trash can next to her bed and splattered onto the mattress. The Administrator and DON both stated they would expect housekeeping or CNA staff to clean the mattress if something was spilled on it.
COVID Vaccine Given After Refusal
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to assure that medication orders were processed accurately through ordering and administration when a COVID-19 vaccination was ordered and then given to a resident whose POA had refused it. R2 had multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, type 2 DM, CVA with hemiplegia and hemiparesis, dysphagia, aphasia, dementia, epilepsy, CHF, cardiomyopathy, HTN, and ASHD. R2’s care plan and MDS documented severe cognitive impairment, impaired communication, and need for partial/moderate assistance with ADLs. The immunization record documented that R2 refused the COVID vaccination, yet a physician order was entered for Comirnaty intramuscular suspension, one syringe one time only for preventative purposes. The MAR/TAR documented the COVID vaccine as started and then given later that day, and the progress note documented that the COVID vaccine was given in the left deltoid and tolerated well. The NP stated she was notified that R2 received a COVID vaccination when he was not supposed to, and the DON stated the wrong order was put in and the vaccination was done anyway. The ADON/Infection Preventionist stated she had the consent form showing the POA refused the vaccination, but she entered the COVID order anyway while processing multiple vaccination consents. The DON also stated she expected nurses to review consent forms and respect a resident’s right to refuse before writing the order and giving the vaccination.
Failure to Assess and Notify Provider for Resident’s Change in Condition Leading to Hospital Transfer
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to assess and respond to a clear change in condition for one resident with significant respiratory and chronic health issues. The resident had diagnoses including acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, COPD, pneumonia, nasal congestion, and postnasal drip, and was normally alert, sociable, and ate 75–100% of meals in the main dining room while self-propelling in a wheelchair. Over a weekend period, nursing staff documented administration of multiple PRN medications for cough, congestion, sinus allergies, and pain, and recorded limited vital signs that often omitted temperature, respirations, and oxygen saturation. Despite these PRN administrations and the resident’s underlying COPD and respiratory history, there was no documented nursing assessment explaining why the PRNs were given, no documented lung assessment, and no comprehensive evaluation of the resident’s status. During this same timeframe, multiple CNAs observed and reported that the resident was not at her usual baseline. CNAs stated the resident refused to leave her room, refused meals, remained in bed, and repeatedly said she did not feel well. One CNA reported that the resident refused to eat all weekend and stayed in bed, and another CNA reported that the resident, who usually ate 75–100% of dinner in the dining room, refused to come out of her room and refused dinner on consecutive days. These concerns were reported to nursing staff, but there is no documentation that licensed nurses performed a head-to-toe assessment, obtained full sets of vital signs including oxygen saturation in response to these reports, or documented any change from baseline. The LPN primarily assigned to the resident over these days acknowledged that the resident was not her usual “jolly chipper self,” stayed in her room, was not eating well, and stated she felt “crappy,” yet the LPN did not notify the provider and could not explain why. On the following day, additional changes were observed and reported. A CNA assigned that morning noted the resident complained of nausea, refused breakfast, remained in bed past her usual time, had vomited on her blanket and clothes, and was incontinent of bowel and bladder despite usually being continent. These findings were reported to the LPN, but the CNA did not take vital signs because she was not asked to do so, and there is no corresponding nursing assessment documented in the record. Another LPN, while walking down the hall, was alerted by a CNA that the resident did not look good and was not herself; he observed that the resident appeared drained with an ashy facial color and reported this to the assigned LPN in the presence of the nurse practitioner. The nurse practitioner then assessed the resident, documented increased fatigue, weakness, diarrhea, altered mental status, ashen/grey skin color, lethargy, foul-smelling diarrhea, poor oral intake, and that the resident was not at her baseline, and arranged transfer to the emergency room. The resident was subsequently admitted to the hospital and diagnosed with RSV. Throughout the period leading up to this transfer, the facility’s own policy required licensed staff to perform appropriate physical assessments, obtain full vital signs, and notify the physician immediately upon recognition of an acute change in condition, but the record shows no such timely assessment or provider notification during the days when the resident’s condition and behavior had clearly changed. The DON stated that when a resident with COPD exhibits respiratory symptoms, she expects nurses to obtain full vital signs including oxygen saturation, assess lung sounds, and document these findings, and that when a normally sociable, good eater refuses to leave their room or refuses meals, this warrants a head-to-toe assessment and provider notification. The nurse practitioner similarly stated that for this resident with COPD, she expected staff to take full vital signs including oxygen saturation, assess lung sounds, document the assessment, and notify her of respiratory status so she could determine if additional treatment or transfer was needed. Both the DON and the nurse practitioner reported that they were not notified of the resident’s refusal of meals, persistent reports of not feeling well, administration of multiple PRN respiratory medications, vomiting, diarrhea, or other changes over the weekend. The facility’s written policy on notification of changes in condition required immediate physician notification and follow-up assessment with documentation of vital signs, pain, orientation, and changes from baseline for any acute change in condition, but the documentation and staff interviews show that these steps were not carried out for this resident during the period in question.
Failure to Implement and Revise Fall Prevention Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that staff implemented existing accident prevention interventions and did not review or revise interventions after changes in residents' conditions, as evidenced by multiple incidents involving three residents at high risk for falls. One resident with a history of falls, cognitive impairment, and multiple comorbidities experienced several unwitnessed falls, resulting in significant injuries including a right ankle fracture and lacerations. Despite documented care plan interventions such as anti-slip tape, signage, and floor mats, these were not observed in the resident's room during inspection, and staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness or inconsistent application of these interventions. The resident's care plan and fall risk assessments consistently identified high fall risk, but interventions were not reliably maintained or updated following each incident. Another resident, also at high risk for falls due to severe cognitive impairment and muscle weakness, experienced an unwitnessed fall after sliding off the bed. The care plan was updated to include a non-slip cushion as an intervention, but during observation, the cushion was not present, and multiple staff members reported never having seen it in use. This indicates a failure to implement the planned intervention intended to prevent further falls for this resident. A third resident with severe cognitive impairment, a history of falls, and mobility deficits experienced multiple falls, some resulting in head injuries and lacerations. Documentation showed that after several of these falls, no root cause analysis was completed, and no new interventions were implemented or documented in the care plan. Staff interviews further revealed a lack of knowledge regarding fall interventions in place for this resident, and the only intervention consistently identified was a chair alarm. These failures demonstrate a lack of consistent implementation and review of fall prevention strategies for residents at high risk.
Failure to Provide Required RN Coverage
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a registered nurse (RN) on duty for at least eight hours per day, as required. Review of the Daily Nursing Shift Assignment Sheets revealed that on multiple dates, including 6/12/25, 6/14/25, 6/15/25, 6/17/25, 6/18/25, 6/19/25, 6/20/25, 6/21/25, and 6/22/25, there was no designated RN present for the required duration. On 6/24/25, staffing consisted of four LPNs, nine CNAs, and an RN serving in the ADON/ICP role, but the administrator confirmed that there were not enough RNs to meet the requirement. The facility's own staffing summary states the goal to meet or exceed required nursing staff levels, yet this standard was not met, potentially affecting all 108 residents in the facility.
Failure to Provide Required Medicare Coverage Notices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide required Medicare notifications to residents or their responsible parties when skilled services under Medicare Part A were ending. Specifically, three residents who were receiving skilled nursing facility (SNF) services did not receive the Advanced Beneficiary Notice (ABN) or the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) as mandated. In each case, the ABN was not issued because the social worker was unaware of the requirement, and the NOMNC was either not provided at all or was given after the end date of covered services, rather than at least two days prior as required by facility guidelines. Record reviews showed that for each of the three residents, the last covered Medicare A service date was documented, but the necessary notifications were either missing or provided late. Interviews with facility staff confirmed that the social worker responsible for issuing these notices was not aware of the need to provide both the ABN and NOMNC, having previously been told by prior administration that only the NOMNC was required. Facility policy states that both forms must be given in writing to the resident or their representative when Medicare Part A coverage ends due to no longer requiring daily skilled services, and that this notice must be delivered with at least two days' notice.
Failure to Prevent Abuse in Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent abuse in two residents, resulting in one resident feeling scared and unsafe. One incident involved a resident who reported being grabbed by another resident, leaving bruises on her arm. The staff did not intervene immediately, and the resident expressed fear and a desire to be moved away from the other resident. The facility's administrator reviewed camera footage and did not observe the alleged grabbing, but acknowledged the other resident's daily behavioral issues, including yelling and screaming, which disturbed other residents. Another incident involved a resident who reported verbal abuse by an agency CNA. The resident, who is paraplegic and requires assistance with hygiene, stated that the CNA refused to clean him after a bowel movement and used foul language. The resident recorded the incident, which was later substantiated by the facility. The CNA was subsequently removed from the facility's schedule. The facility's abuse prevention policy prohibits mistreatment, neglect, and abuse, aiming to create a secure environment for residents. However, the incidents indicate a failure to protect residents from abuse, as evidenced by the lack of immediate intervention and the presence of aggressive behaviors that were not adequately addressed in the care plans.
Failure to Administer Oxygen Therapy and Provide Signage
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to administer oxygen therapy as prescribed and did not provide necessary signage for residents receiving oxygen therapy. Resident 2, diagnosed with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and Respiratory Failure, was observed without an 'oxygen in use' sign on her door. She reported that her portable oxygen tank was empty during lunch, and when she informed the staff, she was advised by an unknown staff member to eat as much as she could without oxygen. The Assistant Director of Nursing acknowledged the importance of oxygen and stated that the CNA should have notified a nurse to refill the tank. Resident 3, also diagnosed with COPD, was observed with an oxygen concentrator that had filters completely covered in dust, and there was no humidification bottle present. The Director of Nursing admitted not seeing the filters but assumed their poor condition. The Maintenance Director did not have information on the concentrator, and a CNA confirmed the absence of 'oxygen in use' signs in both residents' rooms. The facility's policy on oxygen administration, dated October 2010, requires equipment to be in good working order, including the presence of a humidifier bottle and appropriate signage.
Failure to Coordinate Care and Deliver Medical Supplies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper coordination of care for a resident, identified as R3, with their community-based physician, which resulted in a delay in preventative care. R3, who is cognitively intact, was admitted to the facility and later visited their primary physician, who recommended a non-invasive stool DNA test due to concerns about R3's breathing issues making a colonoscopy unsafe. The test kit was delivered to the facility on 5/24/2024, but R3 did not receive it until 6/7/2024, causing distress as R3 had a follow-up appointment scheduled and needed the test results. The delay in delivering the test kit was attributed to a lack of communication and coordination within the facility. The Director of Nursing was unaware of the delivery, and the Assistant Director of Nursing only became aware of the issue on 6/7/2024. The LPN responsible for handling R3's mail admitted to not recognizing the importance of the package, mistaking it for medication, and not prioritizing its delivery. Additionally, the facility's process for handling residents' medical appointments and paperwork was not effectively followed, as R3 returned from the doctor's appointment without the necessary documentation, and the facility staff did not verify new orders or follow-up appointments. The facility's failure to promptly deliver the test kit and ensure proper communication with R3's physician led to a delay in preventative care. The facility's policy requires that mail and deliveries be promptly given to residents, and that any new medical orders be verified and documented. However, these procedures were not adequately followed, resulting in a breakdown of care coordination for R3.
Inadequate Infection Control Program
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop an ongoing infection control program that effectively collected and analyzed infection data, impacting all 88 residents. The infection control log provided was incomplete, lacking dates and organism documentation. The Assistant Director of Nursing, who recently assumed the role of infection control preventionist, acknowledged the deficiencies in the surveillance and infection control processes, noting that the necessary information was not adequately recorded. The infection control book, which was supposed to document infections and organisms, only listed residents' names, identified urinary tract infections, and the medications prescribed, but did not include any organism documentation. The facility's infection control program policy, last revised in 2017, outlined the need for monitoring laboratory reports and physician orders to prevent infections, but this was not effectively implemented, as evidenced by the incomplete documentation.
Delayed Call Light Response in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that call lights were being answered in a timely manner for five residents, as identified during interviews and record reviews. Residents reported that the average wait time for call lights to be answered was approximately 30 minutes, with some instances taking even longer. This issue was raised by residents R32, R36, R70, R77, and R82, who participated in a group meeting and expressed their concerns about the delays in response times. The residents' Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments indicated varying levels of cognitive function, with some residents being cognitively intact and others moderately impaired. Despite these differences, all residents shared similar experiences of delayed responses to their call lights, which they had previously discussed in resident council meetings. The problem with call light response times had been ongoing, as documented in multiple resident council meeting minutes and a grievance filed by another resident, R190. The grievance highlighted that call lights were not being answered and that staff did not work together effectively. The facility's administrator, V1, acknowledged the issue and mentioned that in-services on call lights had been conducted, but was unsure about the results of any audits conducted to address the problem. Additionally, there was no existing policy on call lights, which further contributed to the deficiency. The ombudsman, V6, also confirmed receiving numerous complaints from residents and family members about the call light issue, indicating that the problem persisted despite assurances from the administrator that it would be addressed.
Deficiency in Laundry Services and Resident Clothing Management
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain, clean, and return resident clothing in a timely manner, affecting five out of seven residents reviewed for laundry services. During a group meeting, residents expressed concerns about missing laundry and the facility's lack of response. Specific residents, including those who were cognitively intact, reported ongoing issues with lost clothing that was neither found nor replaced. One resident mentioned that unidentified clothing was donated without prior notification, and another resident's family grievance highlighted missing clothing items. The facility's laundry supervisor stated that residents sign a contract requiring clothing to be labeled, and unclaimed clothing is discarded after 60 days. However, the admission contract did not document this policy. The ombudsman reported receiving numerous complaints about lost laundry, and the facility's policy emphasized the importance of safeguarding personal property. Observations in the laundry room revealed boxes of unlabeled clothing, contradicting the facility's stated commitment to maintaining a comfortable living environment for residents.
Failure to Prevent Resident-to-Resident Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent abuse among residents, as evidenced by multiple incidents involving resident-to-resident altercations. One incident involved a resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of substance abuse, who was observed standing over another resident and punching them near the head. Despite staff intervention, the altercation resulted in no injuries, but the facility's care plan for the resident did not address abuse prevention. Another incident involved the same resident attacking a different resident, who was also cognitively impaired and had a history of aggressive behavior. Both residents were separated, and no injuries were reported. In another case, a cognitively intact resident reported being involved in a physical altercation with a resident who was severely impaired and had a habit of wandering into other residents' rooms. The altercation occurred after the impaired resident was found going through the belongings of the intact resident's roommate. Although no injuries were noted, the incident highlighted the facility's failure to manage residents with wandering behaviors effectively. The facility's abuse prevention policy, revised in 2018, prohibits acts of mistreatment, neglect, and abuse, yet the incidents described indicate a lack of adherence to this policy. The facility's response to these altercations, including notifying family members and separating residents, did not prevent the occurrences, suggesting a deficiency in the facility's ability to protect residents from abuse.
Failure in Antibiotic Stewardship for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents were given the correct antibiotics for the organism causing infection, as evidenced by the cases of two residents. Resident R40 was documented to have a urinary tract infection (UTI) in April 2024 and was prescribed Cephalexin. However, there was no Culture and Sensitivity (C&S) report available to confirm that Cephalexin was the appropriate antibiotic for the infection. The lack of a C&S report indicates that the facility did not verify the suitability of the prescribed antibiotic for R40's specific infection. Similarly, Resident R74 was documented with a UTI in May 2024 and was prescribed Levofloxacin and Cefepime HCL at different times. However, there was no C&S report available to confirm the appropriateness of these antibiotics for R74's infection. The Infection Control Preventionist, who was newly hired, acknowledged that the surveillance and infection control processes were not fully established, and C&S reports were not always obtained when residents were sent to the hospital. This lack of proper antibiotic stewardship and monitoring led to the deficiency in ensuring the correct antibiotics were used for the infections.
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 863 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 27 immediate-jeopardy cases — 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 Caseyville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evercare Of Collinsville | 3.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 10 | 2 |
| Memorial Care Center | 6 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| Au Well Care Home, Inc | 6.8 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Evervella Of Swansea | 6.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 20 | 0 |
| Evercare At Stearns | 7.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for La Bella Of Caseyville.
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.