Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Inspection

ALTA REHAB AT OAK BROOKCMS #1454581 citation on this visit
1 citation recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

This survey cited 1 deficiency. The full statement and the facility’s plan of correction follow, verbatim from the federal record.

F 0551 Give the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights. Level of Harm - Minimal harm or potential for actual harm **NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident representative was given accurate information regarding authorization to use an electronic monitoring device in the resident room, resulting in miscommunication and lack of informed consent related to resident rights. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for electronic monitoring device in the sample of 8.The findings include: R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including muscle wasting and atrophy, COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), acute bronchitis, and positive Covid 19, based on the face sheet.R1's admission observation record dated August 29, 2025 showed that the resident was alert and oriented x two (to person and place). R1's OT (occupational therapy) evaluation dated August 30, 2025 showed that the resident was moderately impaired with decision making. R1's OT treatment encounter notes dated September 1, 2025 showed, that the resident was confused. On September 4, 2025 at 9:58 A.M, V7 (daughter) stated she is the POA (Power of Attorney) for R1. V7 stated that on August 30 2025, she talked to V11 (RN (Registered Nurse)/ Supervisor) about installing a video surveillance camera inside R1's room. V7 stated that she was informed by V11 that according to V2 (Director of Nursing), video surveillance is not allowed. V7 stated that she had sent an email to V2 on September 1, 2025 for the follow up of video surveillance and V2 had not replied to the email.The facility's grievance/complaint form dated August 31, 2025 at 1:30 PM created by V11 (RN Supervisor) showed that R1's family would like to install camera in the room, emphasizing rights.On September 6, 2025 at 3:35 PM, V2 (Director of Nursing) stated that on Sunday, August 31, 2025 she received a call from V11 informing her that V7 (daughter) was requesting to have a surveillance camera inside R1's room. According to V2 she informed V11 that she believed the facility's policy prohibits the use of the camera in the resident room. V2 stated that after talking to V11 she requested a copy of the admission contract, which she received via text message (does not remember who among the administrative staff sent the text message). According to V2, she reviewed the facility's admission contact, which showed that video camera in resident room is prohibited. V2 stated that she called back V11 after reviewing the admission contract and told V11 that camera inside a resident room is prohibited. During the same interview, V2 admitted that when she read the admission contract she focused on the statement, Video cameras are prohibited in resident rooms and she did not noticed the following statement on the same admission contract that read, unless the resident and/or resident representative has followed the steps outlined under the law. V2 stated that she did not receive any email from V7, nor did she talk personally or over the phone to V7 with regards to video camera in R1's room.On September 6, 2025 at 4:02 PM, V14 (admission Assistant) stated that on Sunday, August 31, 2025 (not sure of the time), V2 requested a copy of the facility's admission contract, specifically the part regarding video camera in the resident room and also requested to show the specific part to V11. According to V14, she sent the requested copy to V2, and she showed R1's unsigned admission contract regarding video camera in the Residents Affected - Few (continued on next page) Any deficiency statement ending with an asterisk (*) denotes a deficiency which the institution may be excused from correcting providing it is determined that other safeguards provide sufficient protection to the patients. (See instructions.) Except for nursing homes, the findings stated above are disclosable 90 days following the date of survey whether or not a plan of correction is provided. For nursing homes, the above findings and plans of correction are disclosable 14 days following the date these documents are made available to the facility. If deficiencies are cited, an approved plan of correction is requisite to continued program participation. LABORATORY DIRECTOR'S OR PROVIDER/SUPPLIER REPRESENTATIVE'S SIGNATURE TITLE (X6) DATE FORM CMS-2567 (02/99) Previous Versions Obsolete Facility ID: If continuation sheet Page 1 of 2 Event ID: 145458 Printed: 05/15/2026 Form Approved OMB No. 0938-0391 Department of Health & Human Services Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES AND PLAN OF CORRECTION (X1) PROVIDER/SUPPLIER/CLIA IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: (X2) MULTIPLE CONSTRUCTION 145458 B. Wing A. Building (X3) DATE SURVEY COMPLETED 09/08/2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE Alta Rehab at Oak Brook 2013 Midwest Road Oak Brook, IL 60521 For information on the nursing home's plan to correct this deficiency, please contact the nursing home or the state survey agency. (X4) ID PREFIX TAG SUMMARY STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES (Each deficiency must be preceded by full regulatory or LSC identifying information)
F 0551 Level of Harm - Minimal harm or potential for actual harm Residents Affected - Few FORM CMS-2567 (02/99) Previous Versions Obsolete room to V11. After showing the said part of the admission contract to V11, she (V14) proceeded to R1's room to discuss the contract and have it signed by the resident. V14 stated that on August 31, 2025 between 1:00 PM and 2:00 PM, she arrived at R1's room and at that time V7 (daughter) was present. According to V14, the contract was discussed and signed by R1 in the presence of V7 and during the discussion, V7 asked about installing a camera inside R1's room. V14 stated that she showed the part of the admission contract regarding video camera to V7 while R1 was present. V14 stated that V7 made a comment, This tells me that I have to do certain procedures, but it is allowed as long as steps are followed to which she (V14) agreed. According to V14, V7 did not ask for any further question.R1's signed admission contract dated August 31, 2025 showed under electronic device policy, Cameras: Video Cameras are prohibited in resident rooms unless the resident and/or Resident Representative has followed the steps outlined under Illinois law Authorized Electronic Monitoring in Long Term Care Facilities. (210 ILCS 32/1, et seq.). This includes notifying the Facility of an intent to place the camera and obtaining consent from the Resident and Resident's Roommate, if any. Once the Facility has been notified of the intent to place a camera, the other aspects of the applicable law will be reviewed with the Resident and/or Representative to ensure compliance and to answer any questions.On September 6, 2025 at 4:13 PM, V11 stated that on Sunday, August 31, 2025 at around 1:30 PM, V7 (daughter) asked about putting a camera inside R1's room. According to V11, she told V7 that she was not familiar with the facility's policy regarding camera in the room, but she will find out. V11 stated that she called V2 and asked if the facility allows camera in resident room. V11 stated that according to V2, camera is not allowed in the room, so she went back to V7 and informed that according to V2, camera in the room is not allowed. After providing the said information, V7 insisted that she wanted to put a camera in the resident's room and that it is the resident's right, so she called back V2 about V7's insistence. Prior to her (V11) calling back V2, V14 (admission Assistant) was at the unit and according to V14 she will go inside R1's room to discuss and have R1 sign the admission contract. V11 denied seeing the facility admission contract, specifically regarding the use of camera in the resident room. V11 stated that while V14 was inside R1's room, she called back V2 and informed that V7 was insisting that she wanted to put a camera in the room, V2 again told her that per facility policy, camera is not allowed in the room, which according to V2 had been verified with the Regional Nurse consultant. According to V11, she went back to R1's room after V14 had left the room on August 31, 2025 and she (V11) informed V7 that she again talked to V2 and was again informed that camera in the resident room is not allowed. V11 added that after the said conversation with V7, V7 stated that family will file a complaint about the facility not allowing resident to have camera in the room.On September 6, 2025 at 4:25 PM, V2 stated that she was not aware that V11 had informed the family that camera is not allowed in the room, after V14 had discussed and shown the family the facility's admission contract. V2 again stated that when she reviewed the facility's admission contract, she was focused on the statement that video camera is prohibited in resident room, not realizing that there was a following statement that read, unless the resident and/or resident representative has followed the steps. According to V2, based on R1's signed admission contract, the resident has the right to have a camera in the room as long as steps are followed including signing of the consent, since R1 at the time had no roommate. Event ID: Facility ID: 145458 If continuation sheet Page 2 of 2

Reading this as a family member? Your long-term care ombudsman is a free advocate for residents and families.

Back to top

Citations

1 citation recorded*CMS

What do CMS severity letters mean?

Serious (G-L). Actual harm to a resident, or immediate jeopardy. Codes G through I indicate actual harm; J through L indicate immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety.

General (A-F). No actual harm found, or harm that is minimal. The facility must still submit a Plan of Correction. Most CMS citations land here.

Each letter combines severity with scope: how many residents the deficiency affected.

  • 0551GeneralS&S Dpotential for harm

    F551 - In the case of a resident who has not been adjudged incompetent by the state

    Give the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the September 8, 2025 survey of ALTA REHAB AT OAK BROOK?

This was a inspection survey of ALTA REHAB AT OAK BROOK on September 8, 2025. The surveyor cited 1 deficiency, recorded on the federal Form 2567 statement of deficiencies.

Were any deficiencies cited at ALTA REHAB AT OAK BROOK on September 8, 2025?

Yes, 1 deficiency was cited, each with a CMS Scope and Severity grade. The first was: "Give the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights."

What type of survey was this?

This was a inspection survey conducted by state surveyors under federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) oversight. Findings are published on CMS Care Compare.

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

Concerned about a resident’s care?Find your local ombudsman through the Eldercare Locatoror file a complaint with your state survey agency.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CMS Care Compare public records. Dataset last refreshed . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.