Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Nov 26, 2025
5
Serious findings on record
most recent May 16, 2026
$16,350
Fines, last 3 years
5.40
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 16, 2026 · F-0627 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely.
Why it matters: A rushed or poorly planned move can leave a resident somewhere that can't meet their needs.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: May 20, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 21, 2026 · F-0602 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds.
Why it matters: Residents can lose money, jewelry, or cherished possessions to theft or misuse.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Mar 1, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 13, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Feb 14, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 13, 2025 · F-0909 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames.
Why it matters: Poorly maintained beds and rails can trap or injure residents, sometimes fatally.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Mar 13, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 7, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Apr 8, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaintF-0627
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaintF-0580
G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaintF-0602
View all 23 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
May 16, 2026
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627
May 16, 2026
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580
Jan 21, 2026
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602
Nov 26, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Nov 26, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Nov 26, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Feb 13, 2025
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Feb 13, 2025
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. · from a complaint · F-0909
Sep 19, 2024
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Sep 19, 2024
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814
Sep 19, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Sep 19, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Sep 19, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550
Sep 19, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803
Sep 19, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813
Apr 7, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Feb 9, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Oct 20, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Oct 20, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695
Oct 20, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Aug 23, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint · F-0558
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 3).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
6
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
9
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2025
All citations:
5
Serious citations (G–L):
2
2026
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
2
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
6
0
F
2024
9
1
G ▲
2025
5
2
G ▲
2026
3
2
G ▲
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
1 fine totaling $16,350, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
May 16, 2026
Fine
$16,350
Jan 21, 2026
Payment Denial
16 days from Feb 13, 2026
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityIllinois averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
5.40
Illinois average:
2.99
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
1.15
Illinois average:
0.63
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
4.87
Illinois average:
2.67
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Illinois avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
5.40
2.99
3.95
top 4% in Illinois; top 8% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
1.15
0.63
0.69
top 10% in Illinois; top 11% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
4.87
2.67
3.50
top 4% in Illinois; top 8% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.94
0.56
0.48
top 13% in Illinois; top 7% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
57.3
44.5
45.8
bottom 18% in Illinois; bottom 21% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
33.3
41.8
42.9
top 35% in Illinois; top 33% in the U.S.
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 5.27, RN 1.12, weekend 4.74.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.27 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Smith Village. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
CMS records place this facility in Cook, IL — 202 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 145904.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
The Care File
Visit checklist — Smith Village
2320 West 113th Place, Chicago, IL 60643 · (773) 474-7300
Health inspection rating 2/5 · CMS overall 3/5 · ▲ FEDERAL ABUSE CITATION FLAG· Fines (3y): $16,350
Most serious findings on record:
▲ May 16, 2026 (F-0627, Actual harm, isolated): The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely.
▲ Jan 21, 2026 (F-0602, Actual harm, isolated): The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds.
▲ Feb 13, 2025 (F-0689, Actual harm, isolated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
☐ "What safeguards do you have to protect residents' money and belongings, and what happens when something goes missing?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "How often are beds and bed rails inspected, and who does those checks?"
☐ "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
☐ "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
☐ "CMS reports 57% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 145904 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)