Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around November 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 Rolling Meadows Health Care Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Two residents at high risk for falls experienced multiple incidents without the facility implementing effective immediate interventions to prevent recurrence. Despite documented care plans and fall risk assessments, staff failed to update interventions promptly after each fall, resulting in repeated injuries, including fractures. Staff interviews and record reviews revealed inconsistent documentation and delayed care plan updates, contrary to facility policy.
The facility failed to update the PASRR for two residents with new mental health diagnoses requiring psychotropic medication. Despite documented diagnoses and behaviors, the PASRRs did not reflect the full range of conditions or medications. The Social Services Director did not submit new PASRR applications due to previous rejections and the residents' significant dementia, contrary to Indiana PASRR guidelines requiring updates for significant mental health status changes.
A facility failed to administer dulaglutide to a resident due to a pending order caused by a pharmacy interchange from semaglutide. The order did not appear on the MAR, leading to a missed dose. Interviews revealed that the order required confirmation, which was delayed, highlighting a procedural gap in handling pending medication orders.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and high fall risk reported hip pain, but the facility failed to promptly assess her condition, leading to a delay in treatment for a hip fracture. Nursing staff did not immediately act on the resident's complaints, and there was confusion about the assessment responsibilities.
Failure to Implement Immediate Fall Prevention Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement immediate interventions to prevent future falls for two residents who were reviewed for falls. For one resident with a history of dementia, muscle weakness, and impaired mobility, the care plan identified a high risk for falls and included interventions such as bed alarms, hourly rounding, and proper footwear. Despite these measures, the resident experienced a fall resulting in a left wrist fracture. After returning from the hospital, no new immediate interventions were implemented to prevent further falls. Subsequently, the resident suffered another fall, resulting in a right hip fracture. Interviews with staff confirmed that immediate interventions were not put in place after the initial fall, and care plan updates were delayed until after interdisciplinary team meetings. Another resident with Parkinson's disease, dementia, and muscle weakness was also identified as being at risk for falls. This resident experienced multiple falls over several months, often while attempting to transfer or ambulate without assistance. The care plan included interventions such as education on call light use, anti-skid strips, and keeping personal items within reach. However, after each fall, the immediate interventions implemented were limited to re-education or encouragement to use the call light, which staff and the DON acknowledged would not prevent further falls. Documentation of immediate interventions and care plan updates was inconsistent or lacking, and staff interviews revealed confusion about responsibilities for updating care plans and implementing new interventions. The facility's policies required immediate implementation of interventions following a fall and prompt updates to care plans. However, the records and staff interviews demonstrated that these procedures were not consistently followed. Immediate interventions were either not implemented or were insufficient to prevent further falls, and care plan updates were often delayed or incomplete. This deficient practice resulted in repeated falls and injuries for the residents involved.
Failure to Update PASRR for Residents with New Mental Health Diagnoses
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was submitted for two residents with newly diagnosed mental health conditions requiring psychotropic medication. Resident 76 had a clinical record indicating diagnoses of unspecified dementia, severe, with anxiety, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and a psychotic disorder with delusions due to a known physiological condition. Despite these diagnoses and the administration of multiple psychotropic medications, the resident's PASRR did not list the psychotic disorder or the full range of medications being administered. The PASRR indicated no known mental health behaviors affecting interpersonal interactions, which was inconsistent with the resident's documented behaviors and symptoms. Resident 90's clinical record showed diagnoses of unspecified dementia, anxiety disorder, delusional disorders, and major depressive disorder. The resident was receiving psychotropic medications, including an antipsychotic, on a routine basis. However, the PASRR for this resident also failed to list the psychotic disorder and did not include all the psychotropic medications being administered. Similar to Resident 76, the PASRR indicated no known mental health behaviors affecting interpersonal interactions, which contradicted the resident's documented symptoms and care plan interventions. The Social Services Director indicated that she had not submitted new PASRR applications for these residents due to their significant dementia and previous rejections of PASRR applications when new medications were added. However, according to Indiana PASRR guidelines, a new Level I screening is required when there is a significant change in mental health status, such as a new mental health diagnosis or the addition of a psychotropic medication. The facility's current policy also mandates a Level II resident review for residents with newly evident serious mental disorders or following an inpatient psychiatric stay.
Failure to Administer Medication Due to Pending Order
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that procedures were in place to follow up on pending physician's orders and administer medications in a timely manner for a resident. The resident's clinical record indicated diagnoses of atherosclerotic heart disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. The resident had current physician's orders for several diabetes medications, including insulin glargine, dulaglutide, and metformin. A pharmacist recommended changes to the resident's medication regimen, which were signed off by a nurse practitioner. However, the medication administration record (MAR) lacked documentation of the administration of dulaglutide on the specified date, and there was no record of the medication being held or the physician being notified. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) revealed that the dulaglutide order was pending due to a pharmacy interchange from semaglutide to dulaglutide, which required confirmation. This pending status meant the order did not appear on the MAR, resulting in the medication not being administered as scheduled. The order was eventually confirmed and adjusted, but the initial failure to administer the medication as ordered highlighted a gap in the facility's procedures for handling pending medication orders.
Failure to Promptly Assess Resident's Hip Pain
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a prompt physical assessment for a resident who complained of having sustained a fall and experiencing hip pain. The resident, who had a history of severe cognitive impairment and was at high risk for falls, reported hip pain to her family member. The assessing nurse observed external rotation and swelling of the resident's right leg, and the resident was later found to have sustained a right hip fracture. Despite these symptoms, there was a delay in transferring the resident to the emergency department for further evaluation and treatment. On the day of the incident, the resident's family member reported the resident's complaints of pain to the nursing staff. A Qualified Medication Aide (QMA) checked on the resident but did not notice any bruising and reported the complaint to a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). The LPN authorized the administration of Tylenol for pain without conducting a thorough assessment. Later, another nurse observed the resident's symptoms and called for an ambulance, but this was after a significant delay. Interviews with the nursing staff revealed that there was confusion and a lack of immediate action taken to assess the resident's condition. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the nursing staff had been educated about the importance of nurses completing assessments themselves rather than relying on QMAs. The facility's job description for LPNs emphasized the responsibility for professional assessments and documentation of residents' health, which 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 233 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 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 La Fontaine
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Miller's Merry Manor | 8.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| Vernon Health & Rehabilitation | 8.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Aperion Care Marion Llc | 9.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 13 | 0 |
| Autumn Ridge Rehabilitation Centre | 9.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
| Wesleyan Health Care Center | 10.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 9 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Rolling Meadows Health Care 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.