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

Glacier Hills

1200 Earhart Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105 · Non profit - Corporation · 105 certified beds · (734) 769-0177 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (734) 769-0177 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 13 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

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 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
432 Pine Brae St · (734) 668-7020 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3535 Plymouth Rd · (734) 994-3636 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2020 Green Rd · (734) 994-7200 · Call to confirm hours
Park
3725 Windemere Dr · (734) 794-6000 · Typically dawn to dusk

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
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 held steady at 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
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.2%1.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.2%79.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.7%24.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.3%11.7%12.0%typical

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.

71.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 532 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

71.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
80.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
1.24U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.52hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.64hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 80.4% 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 224 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 1.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 29% 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 SNF71.2%CMS range 67.2–73.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.4%CMS range 7.3–11.910.7%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 discharge80.4%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 discharge50.0%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 discharge64.7%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 identified99.6%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 setting99.4%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 discharge96.7%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.8%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 worsened1.5%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 hospitalization4.9%CMS range 3.1–8.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.741.02Oct 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

1.39
RN hours/ resident / day
1.33
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.98
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.71
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.75
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 105 beds and averages 42.2 residents a day — about 40% occupied, or roughly 63 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 4.71 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.39 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 3.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.03 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.65 to 0.75 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-05-15)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2025-03-19)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · F2025-03-19 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    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 observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to: (1) effectively maintain 1 of 2 outdoor waste receptacles, (2) clean the concrete receptacle pads and adjacent grounds, and (3) effectively clean the outdoor waste grease receptacles and adjacent concrete receptacle pad surfaces effecting 35 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross-contamination, bacterial harborage, and pest attraction/harborage. Findings include: On 03/17/25 at 12:20 P.M., 1 of 2 outdoor waste receptacles were observed missing a drain plug. 1 of 2 outdoor waste receptacles were also observed with a severely bent mounting rod, allowing the receptacle lid to not close completely. The exterior surface of 1 of 2 outdoor waste receptacles were further observed bent inward. The damaged surface area measured approximately 24-inches-wide by 36-inches-long. The outdoor waste compactor assembly and adjacent ground surfaces were additionally observed soiled with accumulated and encrusted dirt and debris (dead…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-19 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    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 call light was kept within resident reach for one resident (#12) out of twelve residents reviewed. Findings Included: Review of the medical record revealed R12 was admitted to the facility 11/14/2018 with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), hypertension, Hemiplegia (paralysis one side of the body) left side, multiple sclerosis, atrial fibrillation, bullous pemphigoid (skin condition causing large fluid-filled blisters), hyperlipemia (high fat content in blood), depression, dementia, pain, overactive constipation, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, anxiety disorder, osteoarthritis (tissue at end of bones wears down), and malnutrition. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/13/2025, revealed R12 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 12 (moderate cognitive impairment) out of 15. During observation and interview on 03/17/2025 at 11:20 a.m. R12 was observed lying down in bed. R12 explained that staff frequently…

    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 · F2024-02-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to effectively clean and maintain food service equipment effecting 42 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross-contamination and bacterial harborage. Findings include: On 02/13/24 at 09:18 A.M., An initial tour of the food service was conducted with Executive Chef S. The following items were noted: Dry Storage Room: The individual white plastic disposable forks were observed unprotected. The inner plastic liner bag within the cardboard box container was also observed open, allowing potential contamination to enter the cavity opening. The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 3-307.11 states: FOOD shall be protected from contamination that may result from a factor or source not specified under Subparts 3-301 - 3-306. Chemical Storage Room: The return-air-exhaust ventilation grill was observed soiled with accumulated dust and dirt deposits. The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 6-501.14 states: (A) Intake and exhaust air ducts shall be cleaned, and filters changed so they are not a source of…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-02-15 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    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

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to effectively clean and maintain the physical plant effecting 42 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross-contamination, bacterial harborage, and decreased illumination. Findings include: On 02/14/24 at 08:25 A.M., An environmental tour of the facility Laundry Service was conducted with Environmental Services Supervisor W. The following items were noted: Clean Linen Room: The wall mounted oscillating fan was observed soiled with accumulated dust and dirt deposits. Soiled Laundry Room: The drywall surface was observed (etched, scored, particulate). The damaged drywall surface measured approximately 12-inches-wide by 20-feet-long. Environmental Services Supervisor W indicated she would contact maintenance for necessary repairs as soon as possible. On 02/14/24 at 12:35 P.M., A common area environmental tour was conducted with Facilities Manager X, Maintenance Team Leader Y, and Environmental Services Supervisor W. The following items were noted: Storage Room (2111): The laminate flooring…

    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 · Dcited before2024-02-15 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    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 provide Physical and Occupational Therapy schedules upon request for three (Resident #25, 43, 151) out of three residents reviewed for accommodation of needs resulting in feelings of frustration. Findings Include: Resident #43 Review of the medical record revealed Resident #43 (R43) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included. A Social Work Progress Noted revealed R43 scored 15 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS). The medical record indicated that R43 was at the facility for a short term rehabilitation stay. In an observation and interview on 02/13/24 at 1:09 PM, R43 was seated in her reclining chair in her room with her feet elevated. R43 had a fiberglass cast on her left leg. A whiteboard was observed in R43's room which identified the care team assignment for the day, along with Physical and Occupational therapy times. R43 pointed out that the whiteboard does not get…

    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 · D2024-02-15 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Resident #149 (R149): Review of the medical record reflected R149 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and with diagnoses that included heart failure and melanoma. R149's Treatment Preferences and Determination of Residents Wishes document reflected selection of, Code D-Comfort measures only. No cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). No artificial nutrition and hydration. The document included a Presenter's Signature, and the resident's signature dated [DATE], the physician signed the document on [DATE]. The document did not include the required witness signatures or the Michigan do-not-resuscitate procedure act language. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) documents were completed in accordance with the Michigan Do-Not-Resuscitate Procedure Act for three (Resident #17, #149 and #350) of three reviewed for Advance Directives, resulting in the potential for code status wishes not being followed in an emergency situation. Findings include: Review of the MICHIGAN…

    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 · D2024-02-15 · tag F0638 — isolated
    Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
    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 complete a timely quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for one (Resident #17) of 13 reviewed for MDS, resulting in the potential for unrecognized and unmet care needs. Findings include: Review of the medical record reflected Resident #17 (R17) admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE], with diagnoses that included hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body), pain and unspecified dementia. The quarterly MDS, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/14/23, reflected R17 scored 13 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool), did not walk and required total assistance of one to two or more people for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, personal hygiene and bathing. R17's MDS history included an annual MDS, with an ARD of 4/4/23; a quarterly MDS, with an ARD of 6/29/23 and a quarterly MDS, with an ARD of 9/14/23. Additional MDS assessments included a discharge return…

    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 · D2024-02-15 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    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 accuracy on a 5 day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for one resident (resident #22) of one reviewed for Passar completion and discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for one resident (resident #46) of 4 reviewed for discharge, resulting in the potential for unmet care needs. Findings include: Review of the clinical record reflected Resident 46 (R46) was an [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included right tibia fracture. Further record review reflected R46 had a planned transfer for inpatient rehab to the Veterans Affair (VA) on 12/05/23. There was no documentation in the clinical record that reflected R46 was hospitalized for an acute medical need/condition. Review of R46's discharge MDS dated [DATE] section A 0310 was coded 10 which indicated this was a planned discharge assessment and return was not anticipated. Section A 2105 was coded as a 4. Short-Term General Hospital (acute care hospital,…

    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 · D2024-02-15 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission/Annual Resident Review was completed after the 30-day exemption period and failed to notify the State Mental Health Authority for 1 of 1 resident (resident #22) reviewed for PAS/ARR, from a total sample of 13, resulting in the potential for unmet mental health treatment and services. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #22 (R22) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included [NAME] Disease, Fibromyalgia, Anxiety, Major Depression, Dysphasia, Speech Disturbances, Difficulty Walking, Muscles Spasms, after care following joint repair, and pain. According to Resident #01 (R01)'s Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed R22 scored 12 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- a cognitive screening tool) and had no behaviors. R22 requires assistance with all care due to upper extremities having contractures…

    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 · D2024-02-15 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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 revise the Care Plan for one (Resident #17) of 13 reviewed for Care Plans, resulting in inaccurate Care Plans and the potential for unmet care needs. Findings include: Review of the medical record reflected Resident #17 (R17) admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE], with diagnoses that included hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body), pain and unspecified dementia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/14/23, reflected R17 scored 13 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool), did not walk and required total assistance of one to two or more people for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, personal hygiene and bathing. The same MDS was coded for upper extremity and lower extremity impairments on one side of the body. On 02/13/24 at 10:13 AM, R17 was observed lying in bed. His left hand was observed to be clenched…

    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 · D2024-02-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake MI00140950 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide showers for one (Resident #48) of two reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) assistance, resulting in unmet care needs. Findings Include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #48 (R48) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic pain syndrome, lumbar spinal fusion, hypertension (high blood pressure), connective tissue disease, and anemia. A Social Work Progress Noted dated 10/24/23 revealed R48 scored 15 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS). The Resident Summary with a date of 10/19/23 revealed R48 required staff assistance of two people for Activities of Daily Living Care, including showers. In a telephone interview on 2/13/24 at 10:15 AM, R48 reported that she went multiple days without receiving a shower which made her feel gross. R48 stated that staff would tell her that they were busy when she requested her…

    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
  • No harm found · B2024-02-15 · tag F0623 — pattern
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    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 that written notification required for facility-initiated transfers were provided to residents or resident representatives for 3 (Resident #17, #23 and #35) of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalization, resulting in the potential of residents and/or representatives being un-informed of the reason for transfer and their appeal rights. This had the potential to affect all 42 residents that resided in the facility. Findings include: Resident #23 (R23) Review of the medical record reflected that Resident #23 (R23) was admitted to facility 3/17/2020 with diagnoses including hemiplegia following cerebral infarct, type 2 diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, major depressive disorder, and vascular dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 1/30/24 reflected that R23 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) score of 15 (cognitively intact). Review of the…

    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
  • No harm found · B2024-02-15 · tag F0625 — pattern
    Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
    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 notify the resident and/or resident's representative of the facility's policy for bed hold for 2 (Resident #17 and #23) of 4 residents reviewed for hospital transfer, resulting in the potential for residents and/or representatives to be uninformed of the bed hold policy. Findings include: Resident #23 Review of the medical record reflected that Resident #23 (R23) was admitted to facility 3/17/2020 with diagnoses including hemiplegia following cerebral infarct, type 2 diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, major depressive disorder, and vascular dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 1/30/24 reflected that R23 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) score of 15 (cognitively intact). Review of the Discharge MDS dated [DATE] reflected that R23 had an unplanned discharge to an acute care hospital and that her return to the facility was anticipated. In an…

    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

“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 TRINITY HEALTH — 19 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 53.3+1.7 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.0+2.0 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 54.0≈ chain avg
Quality measures 4 of 53.7+0.3 vs chain
The other 18 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.3★, per CMS)

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
TRINITY CONTINUING CARE SERVICESOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 07/01/2016
LATOVICK, PAMELAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 06/01/2017
ABRAHAM, TARUNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2022
BERRY, DALEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2009
BOWENS, MARCUSIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/23/2022
BYRON-OILAR, AMYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2022
DEFRAIN, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2021
SKAFF, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2013
MCKINNON, BENJAMINIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner 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.

$23.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-34.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.2M
Related-party expense7% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 2%Medicare 6%Other / private 92%

This home reported $2.2M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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

$322per resident / day
operating cost
$9,785per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$240per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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 235223. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-15, 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