Fairview Nursing and Rehabilitation Community

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.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% 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 64 beds and averages 46.3 residents a day — about 72% occupied, or roughly 18 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.13 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.87 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 2.74 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.28 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.71 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below 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.

23 citations, most serious first. The 15 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · K2023-08-14 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — pattern
  Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  This citation pertains to intake # MI00138591 Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all caregivers and staff received education on dementia care to prevent staff to resident physical and verbal abuse for 1 (Resident #21) of 19 residents reviewed for dementia care, resulting in an Immediate Jeopardy when on 8/1/23 Resident #21 who was known to have dementia behaviors and required 2 person physical assistance due to the behaviors, was sworn at, suffered bruising around his neck, and received a skin tear while receiving cares from an agency employed staff member who had not received training on caring for residents with dementia. Findings include: On 8/8/23 at 12:58pm, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A was verbally notified and received written notification of the immediate jeopardy that began on 8/1/23 due to the facility's failure to ensure all caregivers and staff received education on dementia care to prevent staff to resident physical and verbal abuse. Review of an admission Record dated 4/22/22 revealed Resident #21 was admitted to 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2023-11-08 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake MI00140159. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain continuity of care according to professional standards following a change of condition related to a toe injury for 1 of 3 residents (R102) reviewed for quality of care, resulting in lack of communication, delay in assessment, treatment, and inaccurate documentation, that resulted in osteomyelitis and amputation of toes. Findings include: According to the National Library of Medicine, October 2016, Continuity of care is concerned with the quality of care over time. ideal is the delivery of a 'seamless service' through integration, coordination, and the sharing of information between different providers . https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17018200/ Review of R102's Face Sheet reported the resident had diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke affecting his left non-dominant side, weakness, need for assistance with personal care, and type 2 diabetes mellitus.…

  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 before2023-08-14 · 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 is linked to intake # MI00138591 This citation contains 2 Deficiency Practice Statements, DPS #1 and #2. DPS #1 Based on observations/interviews/record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from staff to resident verbal and physical abuse for 1 (Resident #21) of 19 residents reviewed for abuse, resulting in Resident #21 sustaining a reddened and bruised area extended across the front of his neck and a bandaged wound was present on his upper torso. Findings include: Review of a facility Abuse Prevention Program Policy and Procedure document revised on 9/22, revealed the intent states: Each resident has the right to be free from abuse .of any type by staff or anyone. The facility will provide a safe resident environmnet and portect residents from abuse. Review of an admission Record dated 4/22/22 revealed Resident #21 was admitted to the facility with the following pertinent diagnoses: Psychotic disorder (loss of contact with reality) with Delusions (irrational…

  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 · G2023-08-14 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to implement the care plan for a resident who had known dementia behaviors and required 2-person physical assistance, in 1 (Resident #21) of 19 residents reviewing for care planning, resulting in Resident #21 receiving physical injury and psychosocial harm during cares. Findings include: Review of an admission Record dated 4/22/22 revealed Resident #21 was admitted to the facility with the following pertinent diagnoses: Psychotic disorder (loss of contact with reality) with Delusions (irrational beliefs) due to known physiological condition, need for assistance with personal care, Vascular Dementia (progressive loss of cognitive functioning) with behavioral disturbance, Alcohol dependence with alcohol-induced persisting dementia, other speech disturbances, Disorientation, Restlessness and agitation, Aphasia (loss of ability to verbalize thoughts), and Anxiety disorder. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment of Resident #21 dated…

  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 · G2023-08-14 · tag F0949 — failed to train staff on dementia and abuse — isolated
  Provide behavior health training consistent with the requirements and as determined by a facility assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  This citation pertains to intake # MI00138591 Based on observations, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide in depth Dementia Care training to all current, newly hired and agency employed staff resulting in an incident of staff to resident abuse for Resident #21, with a potential for a decline in physical, mental, and psychosocial well- being and unmet care needs for all residents with dementia. Findings include: Review of Preventing The Abuse of Residents with Dementia or Alzheimer's Disease In The Long-Term Care Setting: A Systematic Review, Published by The National library of Medicine, 2019, revealed . there is an increasing rate of abuse in the long-term care setting, specifically for those individuals with either dementia or Alzheimer's. Common causes and risk factors leading to this abuse include poor training . Review of a facility policy titled Abuse Prevention Program Policy and Procedure, last revised 9/22, a section titled Training revealed the following: Understanding behavioral symptoms of residents that may increase the risk of abuse and neglect…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-21 · 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 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow professional standards of nursing practice related to monitoring laboratory results for one resident (R101) of 3 residents reviewed for professional standards and quality of care, resulting in a delay of treatment for a bacterial infection, the potential for a diminished medical outcome, and the resident not maintaining or achieving their highest practical physical well-being. Findings include:Review of R101's Progress Note, dated 9/15/25 6:02 AM, indicated the Nurse Practitioner (NP) noted the resident continued to complain of low back pain the evening before and was exhibiting confusion. The confusion was said to be worse than usual. A urine sample was obtained and found to be dark and cloudy with sediment. Order was given to send a UA (urine analysis) due to the worsening mental status and low back pain. Spinal x-ray was negative for injury from fall on 9/13/25. Review of R101's Face Sheet, revealed the resident was admitted to the facility…

  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 · Ecited before2025-07-24 · 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 Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to 1). Maintain infection control practices, specifically the use of gloves during administration of insulin injections, 2). Sanitize or clean resident shared equipment specifically a glucometer (a portable device used to measure the concentration of glucose in the blood) for 6 (Resident #25, Resident #17, Resident #7, Resident #30, Resident #28, and Resident #22) of 6 residents reviewed for glucose monitoring during medication administration; and 3). Properly use personal protective equipment (PPE) for a resident in enhanced barrier precautions during a transfer for 1 (Resident #53) of 3 residents reviewed for transfers, resulting in the potential for the spread of infection, cross contamination, and disease transmission. Findings include: Resident #25Review of a Facesheet revealed Resident #25 was a female who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had pertinent diagnosis which included: Type 2 diabetes mellitus 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-24 · 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

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received care in accordance with professional standards of nursing practice for 1 resident (Resident #6) of 5 residents reviewed for medications, resulting in the lack of physician notification of elevated blood sugar levels per physician's order, and the potential for worsening of the medical condition.Findings include: Resident #6Review of a Face Sheet revealed Resident #6 was a male, with pertinent diagnoses which included: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (a condition where the body is not able to properly use sugar from the blood) without complications. Review of an active Physician's Order for Resident #6 revealed, Check blood glucose (blood sugar) at HS (bedtime), Notify MD (medical doctor) of blood glucose less than 70 or greater than 300, At Bedtime 08:00 PM 08/02/2024Review of an active Physician's Order for Resident #6 revealed, Check blood sugar PRN (as needed) Special Instructions: PRN recheck blood sugar if over 350 at norm (normal) check Three Times A Day - PRN Morning, Mid-Day, Evening…

  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 · D2025-07-24 · 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 #1323219. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure incontinence care was received timely, with the appropriate number of staff assistance, and that it was documented for 1 resident (Resident #10) of 3 residents reviewed for ADL (Activities of Daily Living) care resulting in dissatisfaction with care, potential for skin breakdown and injury to occur. Findings include: Resident #10 (R10)Review of the admission Record and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R10's initial admission date to the facility was on 1/3/2023 with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis on right dominant side (muscle weakness/partial paralysis on one side of the body that can affect the arms, legs and facial muscles), reduced mobility, depression and anxiety. Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) reflected a score of 14 out of 15 which indicated R10 was cognitively intact (13 to 15 cognitively intact).During an interview on 7/21/2025 at 3:35 PM, R10 stated that…

  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 · D2025-07-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that an assistive transfer device (gait belt) was used during a transfer for 1 (Resident #53) of 3 residents reviewed for proper transfers resulting in the potential for a fall and/or an injury.Findings include:Resident #53Review of a Facesheet revealed Resident #35 was a male who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had pertinent diagnoses which included: myocardial infarction (heart attack), pneumonia, and congestive heart failure.On 7/21/25 at 1:35 pm, a gait belt (a safety device used to assist individuals with mobility issues, typically worn by a resident and allows for the caregiver to safely move or support a resident while walking or during transfers) was noted to be hanging over the top of the bathroom door in Resident #53's room. Resident #53 reported it was not his and the staff did not use it for him.On 7/22/25 at 12:34 pm, Registered Nurse (RN) S was observed assisting Resident #53 to transfer from his…

  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 · Ecited before2024-08-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  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 ensure proper label and dating of foods in the kitchen resulting in the potential to spread food borne illness to all residents that consume food from the kitchen. Findings Include: During the initial tour of the main kitchen on 8/06/2024 at 9:26 AM, the reach in refrigerator was observed to have the following: 1 lemonade pitcher had a prepare date of 8/1/2024 and a use by date of 8/3/2024. 1 plastic storage container of individual cups of mayonnaise with no label and date. 1 plastic storage container of individual cups of mustard with no label and date. 1 plastic storage container of individual cups of tartar sauce with no label and date. 1 shallow pan with individual bread slices in individual ziploc bags with no label and date. During an interview at 9:40 AM, Dietary Aide (DA) K stated that she didn't work the night before when the individual cups of mayonnaise, mustard and tartar sauce were prepared. DA K threw out the lemonade pitcher and said that it should have been tossed out on 8/3/2024. 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-08 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  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 significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment after a change in health status, in 1 of 13 residents (Resident #40) reviewed for a significant change in condition, resulting in the potential for unassessed physical, mental, emotional, and psychosocial needs. Findings include: Review of a Face Sheet revealed Resident #40 was a female, with pertinent diagnoses which included respiratory failure, heart failure, high blood pressure, atrial fibrillation (an irregular heart rate that results in poor blood flow), anxiety, depression, and obstructive lung disease. Noted Resident #40 readmitted to the facility on [DATE] after a hospital stay and expired on [DATE]. Review of Resident #40's Order History revealed .Hospice to evaluate and treat . with a start date of [DATE]. Review of a Licensed Nurse Progress Note for Resident #40, dated [DATE] at 5:20 PM, revealed .resident returned from (Hospital Name) with hospice order .resident (short 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-08 · 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 properly implement enhanced barrier precautions for 1 (Resident #11) of 13 residents sampled for infection control, resulting in the potential for cross contamination and spread of infection. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #11, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low oxygen levels in the blood), pneumonia, retention of urine (inability to empty the bladder), encounter for attention to tracheostomy (opening in the trachea from outside the neck). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #11, with a reference date of 8/2/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14/15 which indicated Resident #11 was cognitively intact. Section E of the MDS revealed Resident #11 did not reject care during the 14-day assessment period. Section G of the MDS revealed Resident #11 required…

  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 · Dcited before2024-02-08 · 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 #MI00142077 Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide an environment free from abuse in 1 resident (Resident #101) of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. Findings include: Resident #101 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #101 had pertinent diagnoses which included: Alzheimer's disease. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #101, with a reference date of [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2/15 which indicated Resident #101 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #102 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #102 had pertinent diagnoses which included: Unspecified dementia. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #102, with a reference date of [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5/15 which indicated Resident #102 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Investigation Summary provided by the facility, dated [DATE] revealed, . on…

  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 · D2024-02-08 · 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

  This citation pertains to intake #MI00142077 Based on interview and record review the facility failed to implement their abuse prevention policy in 1 resident (Resident #101) of 3 resident reviewed for abuse, resulting in the potential for abuse to go unreported and for abuse to continue. Findings include: Resident #101 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #101 had pertinent diagnoses which included: Alzheimer's disease. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #101, with a reference date of 12/15/23 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2/15 which indicated Resident #101 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #102 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #102 had pertinent diagnoses which included: Unspecified dementia. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #102, with a reference date of 1/3/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5/15 which indicated Resident #102 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Investigation Summary/Witness Statements provided by the facility,…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance

“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

$55,738 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $55,738 — penalty dated 2023-11-08

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 ATRIUM CENTERS — 26 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

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

This home reported $660K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% 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