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 →
Part of chain: CREST HEALTHCARE CONSULTING (11 facilities, chain avg rating 2.2★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 16, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 7, 2023
$5,269
Fines, last 3 years
3.01
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)
The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Why it matters: Poor continence and catheter care leads to infections, skin breakdown, and loss of dignity.
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 28, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 18 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. F-0577
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. F-0761
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. F-0804
View all 18 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
Jan 16, 2025
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · F-0577
Jan 16, 2025
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Jan 16, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Jan 16, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677
Jan 16, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Feb 1, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Mar 7, 2023
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
Mar 7, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Mar 7, 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
Mar 7, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865
Mar 7, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881
Mar 7, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Mar 7, 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
Mar 7, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655
Mar 7, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657
Mar 7, 2023
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
Mar 7, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Mar 7, 2023
C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (1 → 5).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
12
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2024
All citations:
1
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2025
All citations:
5
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
12
1
G ▲
2024
1
0
E
2025
5
0
F
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.
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
Feb 12, 2024
Fine
$1,882
Jan 22, 2024
Fine
$3,387
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:
3.01
Illinois average:
2.99
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.45
Illinois average:
0.63
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
2.56
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)
3.01
2.99
3.95
top 32% in Illinois; bottom 14% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.45
0.63
0.69
bottom 43% in Illinois; bottom 30% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
2.56
2.67
3.50
top 39% in Illinois; bottom 11% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.41
0.56
0.48
bottom 40% in Illinois; top 46% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
43.1
44.5
45.8
top 48% in Illinois; top 45% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
12.5
41.8
42.9
top 5% in Illinois; top 6% 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 3.42, RN 0.52, weekend 2.92.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.42 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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 Taylorville SKLD Nur & Rehab. 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.
All 12 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Crest Healthcare Consulting — 11 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 146048.
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 — Taylorville SKLD Nur & Rehab
800 McAdam Dr, Taylorville, IL 62568 · (217) 824-2277
Health inspection rating 4/5 · CMS overall 4/5· Fines (3y): $5,269
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Mar 7, 2023 (F-0690, Actual harm, isolated): The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
☐ "Where do you post your latest state inspection results and the ombudsman's contact information?"
☐ "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
☐ "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
☐ "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
☐ "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
☐ "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 43% 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 146048 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)