Cass County Medical Care Facility

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

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.

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.

64.5% 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 98 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 43.5% 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 23 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 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 71.5 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 8 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 4.85 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.95 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.31 is at or above 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 4.26 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.10 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.04 to 0.72 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

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.

18 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gdisputed · IDR2026-06-23 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  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 #3047103.Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from staff to resident sexual abuse in 1 resident (Resident #1) of 8 residents reviewed for abuse, resulting in psychosocial harm for Resident #1 who was fearful and anxious after the incident and did not want the staff member to be around her. Findings include: Resident #1 (R1) Review of the admission Record and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R1 was a [AGE] year-old woman admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses including Parkinsonism {a neurological condition (affects the brain, spinal cord and nerves) that cause movement problems such as tremors (involuntary shaking movement), rigidity (stiffness), bradykinesia (slowness of movement), and postural instability} and dementia. Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) reflected a score of 10 out of 15 which indicated R1's cognition was moderately impaired. R1 was transferred to the 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2024-03-20 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  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 #MI00143146 Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide services that meet professional standards of nursing practice related to assessing, monitoring and providing wound care dressing changes for 1 resident (Resident #101) of 3 residents reviewed for professional standards, resulting in ineffective monitoring, dressing changes not completed as ordered, inaccurate documentation, and Resident #101 having a skin tear not cared for for 4 days with signs and symptoms of a wound infection. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #101 had pertinent diagnoses which included: unspecified dementia, general anxiety disorder, reduced mobility, and urinary tract infection. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #101, with a reference date of 1/3/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 1/15 which indicated Resident #101 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Incident Note dated 2/22/24, 02:20…

  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
• Actual harm · G2024-03-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  This citation pertains to intake #MI00143146 Based on interview and record review the facility failed to assess, monitor, and treat a resident with a skin tear in 1 resident (Resident #101) of 3 residents reviewed for quality of care, resulting in an Resident #101 having a skin tear not cared for for 4 days and signs and symptoms of a wound infection due to lack of care. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #101 had pertinent diagnoses which included: unspecified dementia, general anxiety disorder, reduced mobility, and urinary tract infection. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #101, with a reference date of 1/3/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 1/15 which indicated Resident #101 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Physician Orders for Resident #101 revealed .monitor skin tear to right upper thigh every shift for worsening or s/s (signs and symptoms) of infection until resolved started on 2/22/24 at 07:00 AM and Cleanse skin tear to right upper thigh with NS and cover with a dry dressing…

  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 · Fcited before2026-05-07 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain best practices in the food service area resulting in the potential to spread food borne illness to all residents that consume food from the kitchen.Findings include:On 5/5/26 at 9:48 AM, an initial tour of the walk-in cooler found a large bowl of tartar sauce dated 4/8 to 5/8, when asked if this is made in house, Certified Dietary Manger (CDM) DD stated, yes. Further review of the cooler found an open package of hot dogs with no legible date to indicate discard, an open package of sliced turkey dated 4/28 to 5/3, and a chunk of ham dated for discard on 5/2. On 5/5/26 at 10:52 AM, a tour of the Nutrition Kitchen found a container of individual prune pudding cups dated 4/10 to 5/10. When asked if this was an item made in house, CDM DD stated it was. According to the 2022 FDA Food Code section 3-501.17 Ready-to-Eat, Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Date Marking.refrigerated, READY-TOEAT, TIME/TEMPERATURE CONTROL FOR SAFETY FOOD prepared and held in a FOOD ESTABLISHMENT for more than 24 hours…

  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 · E2026-05-07 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  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 oxygen orders were followed consistently for 3 (Residents #57, #53, and #25) of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care resulting in residents receiving incorrect oxygen concentrator (a medical device that delivers purified/concentrated oxygen) flow rates (volume of oxygen delivered per minute and often expressed in liters per minute) and the potential for breathing difficulties.Findings include:Resident #57:Review of Resident #57's admission record, dated 5/7/26, revealed she was an [AGE] year old female with pertinent diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; lung disease that makes it difficult to breathe), acute (sudden/short-term) and chronic (develop gradually/persist over a long period) respiratory failure (condition in which the lungs cannot provide enough oxygen) with hypoxia (low oxygen levels), dyspnea (shortness of breath/difficulty in breathing) and dependence on supplemental oxygen.Review…

  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 · D2026-05-07 · tag F0554 — isolated
  Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
  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 resident was assessed to be appropriate for self-administration of an inhaler for 1 resident (Resident #34) of 1 resident reviewed for self-administration of medications resulting in the inhaler being left unsecured in resident room, resident self-administering the inhaler without staff assessment, and the potential for negative outcomes from taking too much of the medication. Findings include: Resident #34 (R34)Review of the admission Record and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R34's initial admission date to the facility was on 2/7/2023 with pertinent diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease) and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low blood oxygen levels). Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) reflected a score of 14 out of 15 which indicated R34 was cognitively intact. During an observation and interview on 5/5/2026 at 11:54 AM, R34 was lying in bed and an inhaler was…

  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 · D2026-05-07 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolated
  Provide or obtain dental services for 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 follow-up and offer prompt dental services for 1 resident (Resident #6) of 1 resident reviewed for dental care resulting in Resident #6 experiencing bleeding gums, plaque buildup (sticky film of bacteria that causes cavities, gum disease and bad breath if not removed daily) and poor dental hygiene. Findings include: Resident #6 (R6)Review of the admission Record and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R6's initial admission date to the facility was on 1/24/2020 with pertinent diagnoses including cerebral infarction (stroke), hemiplegia affecting right dominant side (paralysis affecting right arm, leg, face) and chronic periodontitis (slow-progressing, infectious, and inflammatory gum disease causing destruction of the tissues and bone supporting the teeth leading to tooth loss if not treated). Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) reflected a score of 11 out of 15 which indicated R6's cognition was moderately impaired. During…

  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 · D2025-11-21 · 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 This citation pertains to Intake #2641076Based on interview and record review the facility failed to revise a person-centered care plan timely for 1 (Resident #101) of 3 residents reviewed for care plan revisions, resulting in the potential for unmet care needs. Findings include:Resident #101Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #101 was a female who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had pertinent diagnoses which included: Cerebral infarction due to thrombosis of the right posterior cerebral artery (stroke on the right side of the brain due to a blood clot resulting in left side weakness).Review of Order Summary for Resident #101 revealed Name Omitted Hospice service to eval and tx (evaluate and treat) with a start date of 10/15/25.Review of Health Status Note for Resident #101 dated 10/15/25 revealed .seen by hospice nurse this shift.Review of Care Plan for Resident #101 revealed .Focus/goal/interventions.I wish for hospice services.intervention: coordinate care with hospice staff…

  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 · D2025-11-21 · 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 This citation pertains to Intake #2641076Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain adequate supervision to ensure the safety of 1 (Resident #100) of 3 residents reviewed for safety, resulting in Resident #100 experiencing a fall that resulted in a left side pubic rami fracture (a fracture of the pelvis bone). Findings include:Resident #100Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #100 was a male who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had pertinent diagnoses which included: Repeated falls, dizziness, and weakness.Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #100, with a reference date of 10/14/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10/15 which indicated Resident #10 was moderately cognitively impaired. (BIMS score 8-11 indicates moderate cognitive impairment).Review of Care Plan for Resident #100 revealed Focus: I am at high risk for falls and injury.cognitive loss, general weakness, poor needs/safety awareness,…

  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 · Fcited before2025-03-25 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions and ensure proper labeling and dating of foods in the kitchen and the resident refrigerator in the activity room, resulting in the potential to spread food borne illness to all residents that consume food from the kitchen and residents that store food in the activity room refrigerator. Findings include: During the initial kitchen tour on 3/23/2025 at 9:41 AM, 1 spout on the coffee machine had lime buildup around the spout (white crusty and flakes around it). During another visit to the kitchen on 3/24/2025 at 9:31 AM, the same spout was observed to still have lime buildup around it. Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) TT stated that it should have been cleaned the day before and they must have missed it. During the initial kitchen tour on 3/23/2025 at 9:52 AM, Dietary Aide (DA) FFF accompanied this surveyor and the following items were observed: The ice-cream freezer had 3 individual bowls of hand dipped ice cream in them with no label and dates and ice cream was splattered on 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  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 This citation contains two Deficient Practices Statements, A & B. Deficient Practice Statement A. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to have an active and ongoing plan for reducing the risk of Legionella and other opportunistic pathogens of premise plumbing (OPPP). This deficient practice has the increased potential to result in water borne pathogens to exist and spread in the facility's plumbing system and an increased risk of respiratory infection among any or all the residents who reside in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility Water Management Plan book on 3/24/25 at 4:00 pm, revealed no documentation regarding a team of staff members who meet to discuss water management, no test results, and no risk assessment that had been completed. In an interview on 3/24/25 at 5:00 pm, Maintenance Director (MD) DD reported he was not aware of a team related to water management in the building. In an interview on 3/24/25 at 5:05 pm, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A reported 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-25 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  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 provide an environment that promoted a dignified dining experience for 4 residents (Resident #15, #10, #49, & #40) of 4 residents reviewed for dignity, resulting in feelings of disappointment with the dining experience. Findings include: During an observation on 03/23/25 at 11:37 AM, dining service had started, and residents were being served roast beef, broccoli, French fries or baked beans. On 03/23/25 at 11:46 AM, this writer observed there were multiple residents seated throughout the dining room who had not received their lunches. Noted no particular order for meal tray delivery. In an interview on 03/23/25 at 11:47 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) U reported a resident who was not served had ordered a special meal and those take longer to cook. CNA U asked Dietary Aide (DA) AA where the resident's food was as the other residents at the table had their meals already. In an interview on 03/23/25 at 11:56 AM, this writer requested from Activity Aide (AA) XX who were the multiple residents still…

  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 · D2024-04-25 · tag F0557 — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
  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 maintain the dignity of one resident (#46) of 18 residents reviewed for dignity, by denying the resident the right to use personal belongings of choice in her room. This deficient practice resulted in decreased ability to pursue an independent activity of choice, and feelings of frustration and disappointment. Findings include: Resident #46 Review of a facility policy titled Resident Personal Belongings with a review date of 4/24 revealed: It is the policy (facility name omitted) to protect the resident's right to posses personal belongings .for their use while in (facility name omitted) . will support the resident's right to .use personal possessions to promote a homelike environment . Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #46, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: major depressive disorder and occipital neuralgia (condition in which the occipital nerves are inflamed causing…

  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.

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Fines & penalties

$15,593 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $7,796 — penalty dated 2024-03-20
• $7,797 — penalty dated 2024-03-20

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 4 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.

About 79% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $37K 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 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

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