Mission Point Nursing & Physical Rehabilitation Ce

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.

56.4% 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 71 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 75.8% 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 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 52% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 77 beds and averages 69.8 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 7 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 3.70 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.29 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 3.14 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.93 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.88 to 0.47 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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 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.

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.

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

• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-03-05 · 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 MI00150276 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from resident-to-resident mental and psychosocial abuse for 1 (Resident #106) of 4 residents reviewed for abuse, resulting in Resident #106 experiencing mental anguish, intimidation, and fear. Findings include: Review of Signs and Symptoms of Mental Abuse, Sanjana [NAME], 5/8/23, www.verywellmind.com revealed Mental abuse, also known as psychological or emotional abuse, involves deliberately . causing .emotional pain, or trying to control or manipulate them through verbal or non-verbal communication. These are some of the different types of mental abuse .Intimidation .Harassment .Controlling behaviors .Verbal displays of anger, such as yelling .Mental abuse .can cause deep emotional wounds that take time to heal. Resident #106 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #106 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which…

  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 · G2025-03-05 · 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 #MI00150233 Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and implement effective interventions to prevent falls with injury for a resident with a history of multiple falls in 1 (Resident #100) of 3 residents reviewed for falls, resulting in Resident #100 falling and sustaining a humerus (bone of the upper arm) fracture and significant pain. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #100 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: unsteadiness on feet, repeated falls, cognitive communication deficit, weakness, and need for assistance with personal care. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #100 with a reference date of 2/11/25, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 1/15 which indicated Resident #100 was severely cognitively impaired. Section A of the MDS revealed Resident #100 was admitted to the facility from…

  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
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-12-10 · 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

  This citation pertains to intake #MI00148287 Based on interview andrecord review, the facility failed to protect the residents right to be free from resident to resident sexual abuse in 1 of 1 residents (Resident #30) by Resident #58 Findings include: Review of Incident Report dated 11/3/24 revealed Reported resident (Resident #30) was outside the south cafe door when another male resident (Resident #58) was seen with his hand in her pants. It is reported by witness resident (Former Resident (FR) VV) that resident (Resident #30) tried to roll away and male resident (Resident #58) grabbed her (Resident #30) hair and pulled her back. Resident #30 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #30 had pertinent diagnoses which included: dementia and anxiety. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #30, with a reference date of 11/19/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2/15 which indicated Resident #30 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Care Plan for Resident #30 revealed Focus, Goals, and Interventions: I have severe impaired…

  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 · D2026-02-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  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 develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan in 1 of 17 residents (Resident #36) reviewed for comprehensive care plans, resulting in the potential for unmet medical and nursing needs.Findings include:Resident #36 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #36 was a male, originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included stroke, diabetes with diabetic neuropathy (nerve damage causing numbness, tingling, burning and weakness), dementia, depression, anxiety, high blood pressure, and atrial fibrillation (an irregular heart rhythm that results in poor blood flow and can lead to blood clots). Review of a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #36, with a reference date of 12/30/25, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated he had severe cognitive impairment. Review of an Order Summary Report for Resident #36 revealed…

  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 · D2026-02-12 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
  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 the appropriate therapeutic diet food textures were provided consistently for 3 (Residents #13, 71, and a confidential informant) of 3 residents reviewed for therapeutic diet food textures resulting in dissatisfaction with food provided, decreased oral intake, and weight loss.Findings include:Resident #13: Review of Resident #13's face sheet, undated, noted an admission date of 1/16/2026 and a pertinent diagnosis of oropharyngeal phase dysphagia (a swallowing disorder occurring in the mouth and throat). Review of Resident #13's brief interview for mental status, dated 1/23/26, was scored 9 which reflected moderately impaired cognition. During an interview on 02/10/2026 at 10:42 AM, Resident #13 reported she was on a mechanically altered minced and moist diet (Minced and Moist is a level 5 mechanically altered diet from the International Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) Diet Standardisation (sic) Initiative (DDSI) characterized by…

  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 before2026-02-12 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  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 that 1.) a physician order was in place for dialysis treatments (procedure that removes excess water, solutes, and toxins from the blood in people whose kidneys cannot perform these functions) and 2.) post (after) dialysis assessment and monitoring was documented for 1 (Resident #11) of 1 resident reviewed for dialysis care, resulting in an incomplete reflection of the resident's care.Findings include:Resident #11Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #11 was a male, with pertinent diagnoses which included: chronic kidney disease, stage 4 (severe) (a disease in which the kidneys don't filter excess waste and fluid from the blood effectively), and acute kidney failure (a condition in which the kidneys lose the ability to filter waste from the blood). On 2/11/2026 at 8:09 AM, this surveyor attempted to visit Resident #11 and was informed by nursing staff that the resident was at dialysis.On 2/12/26 at 9:48 AM, a review of Resident #11's Order Summary revealed no physician's order for dialysis care 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-12 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE) for a resident on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) during high-contact resident care activity for 1 (Resident #8) of 4 residents reviewed for EBP, and to have an active and ongoing plan for reducing the risk of legionella and other opportunistic pathogens of premise plumbing (OPPP), resulting in the potential for the spread of infection and an increased risk of respiratory infection among all residents in the facility.Findings include:Resident #8 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #8 was a female, with pertinent diagnoses which included: dependence on renal (kidney) dialysis (procedure that removes excess water, solutes, and toxins from the blood in people whose kidneys cannot perform these functions). Review of a Physician's Order for Resident #8 revealed, Enhanced Barrier Precautions while performing high-contact care activities.Start Date 01/28/2026 Review of 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-05 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the 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 This citation pertains to intake number MI00150233. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify a responsible party of a change in care/condition for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #102) reviewed for notification of change, resulting in the responsible party not participating in medical decisions regarding care and treatment. Findings include: Review of a Change of Condition policy with a reference date of 7/24 revealed: Policy: It is the policy of this facility to inform residents/legal representative, attending physician or designee of a change in a resident's condition. 2. The facility will inform the .resident representative (s) when there is- .b. a deterioration in health . Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #102 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: huntington's disease (an inherited disorder that causes nerve cells in parts of the brain to gradually break down and die), dementia (disease that causes a progress decline 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 · D2025-03-05 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
  Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
  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 #MI00150276 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to operationalize its abuse policy and procedure for 3 residents (Resident #105, Resident #106 and Resident#107) of 3 residents reviewed for resident-to-resident abuse, resulting in 1.staff not reporting resident to resident observations of abuse to the Nursing Home Administrator immediately, 2. the facility not initiating a thorough investigation 3. the facility not reporting allegations of abuse to the state agency,and the potential for further resident to resident observations of abuse to go unreported and uninvestigated. Findings include: Resident #105 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #105 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: depression, paraphilia (intense or recurring sexual arousal from atypical situations, objects, fantasies, behaviors, individuals or places), unspecified dementia with psychotic disturbance (loss of contact with…

  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 · D2025-03-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  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 # MI00150276. Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to report allegations of abuse to the State Agency in a timely manner in 3 of 3 residents (Resident #105, Resident #106 and Resident #107) reviewed for abuse and reporting, resulting in the potential for additional allegations of abuse and to go unreported and delayed investigation. Findings include: Review of an Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation policy with a reference date of 10/24 revealed Policy: It is the policy of this facility to provide protections for the health, welfare and rights of each resident .Definitions: Abuse means the willful infection of .intimidation .mental anguish . which can include resident to resident altercations .mental abuse includes .harassment .VII. Reporting/Response .2. Reporting of all alleged violations to the state agency .within the specified timeframes: a. Immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve…

  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 · Dcited before2025-03-05 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  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 intakes MI0015276 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to investigate an allegation of abuse for 3 residents (Resident #105, Resident #106 and Resident #107) of 3 total residents reviewed for abuse resulting in the potential for the allegation to not be thoroughly investigated and further abuse to occur. Findings include: Resident #105 & Resident #106 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #105 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: depression, paraphilia (intense or recurring sexual arousal from atypical situations, objects, fantasies, behaviors, individuals or places), unspecified dementia with psychotic disturbance (loss of contact with reality), and anxiety. In an interview on 3/3/25 at 3:09pm, Resident #106 reported she was walking down the hall with a therapist approximately 1 week earlier when Resident #105 moved toward her abruptly and began repeatedly saying in an aggressive, loud tone of voice,…

  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 · D2025-03-05 · 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 This citation pertains to intake #MI00150276 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a referral was made for a level II evaluation (a comprehensive evaluation completed by the local (state mental health authority) for one (Resident #105) of one resident reviewed for PASARR (Preadmission Screening/Annual Resident Review) screenings, resulting in a potential for unmet behavioral health needs. Findings include: Review of a facility policy Resident Assessment-Coordination with PASARR Program with a reference date of 9/24 revealed Policy: This facility coordinates assessments with the preadmission screening and resident review (PASARR) program under Medicaid to ensure that individuals with a mental health disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition receives care and services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs .9. Any resident who exhibits a newly evident or possible serious mental disorder .will be referred promptly to the state mental health authority…

  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 · Dcited before2025-03-05 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  This citation pertains to intake #MI00150276 Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records in 1 of 3 residents (Resident #105) reviewed for complete documentation, resulting in the lack of proper documentation of evaluation of abusive behaviors. Findings include: Review of Principles for Nursing Documentation published by the American Nurses Association, 2010, revealed Clear, accurate, and accessible documentation is an essential element of safe, quality, evidence-based nursing practice. Review of Resident #105's progress notes, incident reports and behavioral logs revealed no documentation of resident-to-resident altercations on 2/26/25. In an interview on 3/4/25 at 10:43am, LPN H reported she witnessed Resident #105 aggressively confront Resident #105 in the hallway and again in the therapy gym on 2/2/6/25. LPN H reported Resident #106 appeared scared as Resident #105 got in her face and made comments about wanting to spend time with her. LPN reported she was concerned for Resident #106's wellbeing and initially tried…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

$45,438 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• $45,438 — penalty dated 2025-03-05
• Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-03-27 for 12 days

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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to MISSION POINT HEALTHCARE SERVICES — 14 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 →

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

2 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.

About 73% 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 $1.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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