No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Medilodge of Green View

1234 Golf Course Road, Alpena, MI 49707 · For profit - Corporation · 39 certified beds · (989) 356-1030 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (989) 356-1030 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0605) — cited Jul 2025Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
101 Oxbow Dr · (989) 358-8100 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1185 US Highway 23 N · (989) 358-3950 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1025 US Highway 23 N · (989) 354-4012 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Sytek Park · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased4.7%10.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.1%5.4%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.6%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.6%1.5%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms8.3%4.3%6.5%worse
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.3%3.0%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened7.3%12.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication25.8%19.4%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.7%5.1%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control31.8%20.0%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table5.6%14.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.0%1.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine83.3%79.5%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.5%24.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit16.9%11.7%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.471.841.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.391.641.80worse

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

62.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 48 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

62.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
60.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.35U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.16hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.15hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 60.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 33 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 60% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF62.3%CMS range 45.9–75.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.0%CMS range 7.0–14.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge60.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge45.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge60.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified95.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.6%CMS range 3.4–13.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.991.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

1.78
RN hours/ resident / day
0.21
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.44
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.43
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.98
RN hoursweekends
45.0%
Total nursing turnover
35.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 39 beds and averages 37.0 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.43 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.78 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.44 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.41 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.85 on weekdays — 30% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 2.11 to 0.98 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-31)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-07)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · G2024-08-07 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a mobility bar was properly fixated to a bed frame for one resident (Resident #21) of 6 residents reviewed for accident hazards and bed safety. This deficient practice resulted in two separate falls from bed resulting in a concussion and a hip fracture requiring surgical intervention. Findings include: Resident #21 (R21): Review of R21's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed initial admission to the facility on 3/24/22 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), right foot amputation, and depression. Review of R21's most recent Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment revealed a score of 15, indicative of intact cognition. Review of the facility census revealed R21's most recent hospitalization was 7/30/24 - 8/5/24. On 8/6/24 at 10:38 AM, R21 was observed lying in bed with a fall mat placed on the floor on the left side of her bed and a mobility bar attached to the left side of the bed…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-07-31 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespread
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to maintain a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment. This resulted in an increased potential for contamination and a possible decrease in satisfaction of living among all residents. Findings Include:On 07/30/2025 at 10:27 AM, it was noted that the drain line on the ice machine in the main dining room off the kitchen had black slime growing on end of the pipe. Maintenance Director F observed the drain pipe, and stated he cleans the ice machine and the drain tray weekly, but not the drain line that hangs above the floor drain.On 7/29/25 at 10:31 AM, the register cover in room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed dirty with brown splatters on the wall and had been re-enforced to hold the front and the top of the unit together. On 7/29/25 at 12:42 PM, during an interview with Guardian/Conservator G she was asked about the heater/register in room [ROOM NUMBER] and stated that it looks terrible, but functions fine. She stated the register was beat up and…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
    Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the physician documented the clinical rationale and duration of use in the medical record for a PRN (as needed) psychotropic medication for one Resident (#6) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: Resident #6 (R6) was admitted to the facility 6/23/25. A Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented R6 had severe cognitive impairment and received psychotropic medications. There were no behaviors coded in the MDS.The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) of R6 contained a physician's order dated 7/9/25 for alprazolam (an antianxiety medication) 0.25 mg (milligrams) every 24 hours PRN for anxiety. A medication history review revealed the PRN alprazolam was initially ordered on 6/24/25.A pharmacist medication regimen review (MRR) for R6 dated 6/24/25 read, in part: .Note to attending physician/prescriber.This resident has an order for PRN alprazolam. Please evaluate current diagnosis, behaviors and usage…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#2) of one resident reviewed for PASARR (Preadmission screening/Annual Resident Review) had a Level one (1) OBRA (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act) screening sent to the Community Mental Health Services Program (CMHSP) for a level two (2) OBRA evaluation. Findings include:The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) of Resident #2 (R2) revealed an admission date of 6/19/25. R2's diagnoses included but were not limited to: Bipolar Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder. A Level 1 screening dated 6/11/25 documented R2 had a diagnosis of mental illness and had received treatment for mental illness, including psychotropic medications within the last 14 days. The EMR did not contain a Level 2 OBRA evaluation, and no documentation was in the EMR indicating a Level 1 had been referred to the CMHSP for evaluation.The MDS Nurse (Registered Nurse (RN) C) was interviewed on 7/30/25 at 1:41 PM. RN C confirmed she was the staff member responsible for completing the PASARR. RN C said there was not a Level 2 for R2 because a…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-07 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were safely administered in an environment of a residents choosing for one Resident (R191) of twelve residents reviewed for Residents' Rights. Findings include: During medication administration observation on 8/7/24 at 7:24 a.m., Registered Nurse (RN) E provided Resident #191 (R191) her prescribed medications while R191 was eating breakfast in the dining room with other residents. RN E placed the medications directly on the table next to R191 and exited the dining room without observing R191 take the medications. The Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed on 8/7/24 at 10:30 a.m. The DON agreed medications should not be provided in the dining room unless a resident prefers to take his or her medications in the dining room. The DON said the resident preference for administration locale would be in the care plan if a resident wants medications administered in a public area such as the dining room. R191 was interviewed on 8/7/24 at 11:51 a.m. When asked about receiving medication while in…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-07 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure assistance was provided with donning a back brace for one Resident (R20) of four residents reviewed for range-of-motion and mobility. Findings include: Resident #20 (R20) On 8/5/24 at approximately 9:15 a.m., a Thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO - a type of back brace) was observed on a chair in R20's room. R20 was sitting in a wheelchair talking on the phone and was not visibly wearing a different brace or device to stabilize or support the spine. On 8/5/24 at 12:47 p.m., the TLSO remained in the chair in R20's room. When asked about the TLSO, R20 said, I broke my back and I'm supposed to wear that when I'm out of bed, but I can't put it on by myself. R20 indicated she was admitted to the facility for skilled rehabilitation services after experiencing a fall at home that resulted in a spinal fracture. R20 was asked if the staff assisted with donning the brace. R20 said the therapist was assisting with the brace but skilled therapy…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-07 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to: 1. Document the rationale for declining gradual dose reductions for an antipsychotic medication for one Resident (R1) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, and 2. Document the rationale and duration of PRN use of a psychotropic medication for one Resident (R6) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: Resident #1 (R1) A review of the physician's orders for R1 included an order for Abilify (an antipsychotic medication) 10 milligrams (mg) daily. A review of R1's medical record did not reveal any attempts at Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR) of the Abilify since R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A form Antipsychotic Gradual Dose Reduction Form dated 11/23/23 was in R1's record. The form documented the Antipsychotic medication to be addressed was Abilify for Bipolar disorder and hallucinations. A box was checked that read: a gradual dose reduction is contraindicated for the following reason: . but no…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were appropriately administered for two Residents (R4 and R17) of four residents reviewed for infection control practices during medication administration. Findings include: During medication administration observation on 8/6/24 at 7:41 a.m., Registered Nurse (RN) A was preparing medications for Resident #4 (R4) at the medication cart. RN A picked up a plastic water cup by the lip of the cup with ungloved hands to set the cup on the med cart. RN A poured water into the cup they had just touched with bare fingers and gathered the medications and cup of water and entered R4's room. RN A placed the cup of water, a medication cup containing R4's medications, and an insulin syringe on R4's bedside table without a barrier. RN A handed R4 the medication cup containing the medication. When R4 attempted to place the medications from the cup into his mouth, three medications fell from the cup onto R4's bed. RN A picked up the medications with bare, ungloved fingers and placed the three medications…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-09-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive, facility-wide Infection Control Program as evidenced by failure to: 1. Don, doff, and disinfect PPE (personal protective equipment) for residents with confirmed or suspected of COVID-19 infection. 2. Assess for COVID-19 symptoms and implement transmission-base precautions timely. 3. Complete infection control analysis, correlation, and trending of resident and staff infections. 4. Maintain timely and accurate infection control line listings and surveillance mapping. 5. Properly retrieve meal room trays from COVID-19 positive rooms. 6. Ensure disinfectant chemicals used to clean and disinfect transmission based precaution (TBP) rooms met the minimum concentration specified by the vendor of the chemical. This deficient practice has the potential to result in the transmission of pathogens between residents rooms and the spread of infectious organisms to all 32 vulnerable residents. Findings include: On 9/19/23 at…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-21 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5 percent, for two Residents (#2 & #7) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. This deficient practice resulted in lack of assessments to determine efficacy of respiratory medications and the potential for undesirable therapeutic effects from inaccurate insulin administration. Findings include: Resident #2 (R2) Medication administration for R2 on 9/20/23 at 12:10 PM, was observed performed by Registered Nurse (RN) H. This included the administration of Albuterol Sulfate Inhalation Nebulizer Solution 2.5 mg (milligrams) / 3 ml (milliliters), 3 ml inhale orally via nebulizer (machine that turns liquid medication into a fine mist and inhaled though the mouth into the lungs). RN H did not have a stethoscope with her. RN H failed to listen to R2's lung sounds, check heart rate and respiration rate, and obtain a pulse ox (oxygen saturation level in the blood) prior to treatment. On 9/20/23 at 12:30 PM, an interview was conducted with RN H who was asked…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to MEDILODGE — 53 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.1+1.9 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.7+1.3 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 53.7+1.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.0≈ chain avg
The other 52 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
1 of 5Medilodge of FarmingtonFarmington, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Grand BlancGrand Blanc, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Grand RapidsGrand Rapids, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of HowellHowell, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of MarshallMarshall, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Montrose IncMontrose, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of MunisingMunising, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Sault Ste. MarieSault Ste. Marie, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of SouthfieldSouthfield, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of WestwoodKalamazoo, MI 2 of 5Medilodge at the ShoreGrand Haven, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of Capital AreaLansing, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of CheboyganCheboygan, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of East LansingEast Lansing, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of FrankenmuthFrankenmuth, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of GTCTraverse City, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of KalamazooKalamazoo, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of LudingtonLudington, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of St. ClairEast China, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of Sterling HeightsSterling Heights, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of West BloomfieldWest Bloomfield, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of Campus AreaEast Lansing, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of HillmanHillman, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of LivingstonHowell, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of LivoniaLivonia, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of Mt. PleasantMt. Pleasant, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of PortagePortage, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of ShorelineSterling Heights, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of Tawas CityTawas City, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of TaylorTaylor, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of ZeelandZeeland, MI 3 of 5The Lodge at TaylorTaylor, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of GaylordGaylord, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of HollandHolland, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of LansingLansing, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of LeelanauSuttons Bay, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of MilfordMilford, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of OkemosOkemos, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of RichmondRichmond, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of Traverse CityTraverse City, MI

Showing 40 of 52; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
EVEREST OPCO GROUP LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 02/01/2018
B&Y HEALTHCARE S CORPOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/01/2018
B&Y TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/01/2018
CODY HEALTHCARE S CORPOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/01/2018
CRAIG FLASHNER 2007 TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/01/2018
NORCROSS, ROBERTIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 02/01/2018
ROGERS, STACEYIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 02/01/2018
KIRK, KRISTINEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 02/01/2018
FLASHNER, CRAIGIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/01/2018
PERLSTEIN, YITZCHOKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/01/2018
BLOSSOM HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/01/2018
PRESTIGE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/01/2018

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

7 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$4.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+7.9%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$250K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 63%Medicare 12%Other / private 26%

This home reported $250K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$309per resident / day
operating cost
$9,381per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$335per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MI

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Michigan Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Michigan
$11,254/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$11,969/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,818/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 235583. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-31, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next