Allegria Village
15101 Ford Rd, Dearborn, MI 48126 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 89 certified beds · (313) 584-1000 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (19) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- nursing-staff turnover (63%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 21% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
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
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 13.6% | 10.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.2% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.2% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 18.8% | 4.3% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.8% | 3.0% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.6% | 12.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 9.3% | 19.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.8% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.7% | 5.1% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.9% | 20.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.6% | 14.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.1% | 1.1% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 67.6% | 79.5% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 33.1% | 24.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.1% | 11.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.60 | 1.84 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.29 | 1.64 | 1.80 | better |
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
59.4% 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 318 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 25.5% 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 94 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 0.54 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 84% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 59.4%CMS range 52.9–66.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.2%CMS range 8.8–14.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 25.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 38.3% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 36.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 87.1% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 88.3% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 90.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.7% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.7%CMS range 3.6–8.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.94 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 89 beds and averages 84.2 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 5 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 3.99 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.48 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.37 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 3.51 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.19 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.56 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 63% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
19 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-03-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 MI00142789. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to properly assess (obtain vital signs and complete neurological checks) after a reported, unwitnessed fall for one resident (R603) out of six residents reviewed for falls. R603 was on anti-coagulant therapy. R603's fall was followed by hospitalization for a brain bleed and subsequent death. Findings include: Review of an admission Record in the EHR (Electronic Health Record) revealed, R603 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included chronic atrial fibrillation and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed R603 had no cognitive impairment as indicated by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, out of a total possible score of 15. Review of a progress note with a date of [DATE] at 2:23 p.m., documented, Around 1:50 PM, assigned CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) reported to writer that resident told her…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-20 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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 ensure an effective means of communication was established in a timely manner for one resident (R89) out of one resident reviewed for communication, resulting in language barriers and resident frustration. Findings include: On 9/22/25 at 11:23 AM, R89 was observed sitting in her wheelchair in her room. R89's Resident Representative (RR) was sitting in the room also. R89's RR said that R89 understands and speaks Arabic, but not English. R89's RR said he is present with R89 from 7:30 AM to 7:30 PM and that the facility should have Arabic-speaking staff available to interpret for R89 at other times. According to R89's RR, there was no method provided for communicating with R89 when he was away from the facility. On 9/22/25 at 11:40 AM, Patient Advocate B entered R89's room. Patient Advocate B confirmed that R89 should have been provided with a communication board upon arrival on Friday (9/19/25). Patient Advocate B added, We have staff that speak Arabic that can interpret for (R89). R89's RR said there was no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-20 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow standards of practice for one (R89) of five residents reviewed for Medication Administration resulting in R89 having medications held without a physician's orders and one medication order not being correctly transcribed on the Medication Administration Record.Findings include: On 9/23/2025 at 8:38 AM during observation of R89's medication administration, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) D said they were holding some medications because the resident's Blood Pressure (BP) was low at 109/58. (According to the American Heart Association 2017; Low blood pressure is considered less than 90/66 mm/Hg - millimeters of mercury.) LPN D withheld the following three medications from R89: 1) Isosorbide Mononitrate Extended Release (ER) 30 mg 24-hour release, 2) Metoprolol Succinate ER 50 mg, and 3) Amiodarone 100 mg. R89's Physician's orders and Medication Administration Record (MAR) were reviewed with LPN D. It was confirmed there were no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-20 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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 have a medication error rate below 5%.Findings include:During the medication administration task nine errors were observed from 34 opportunities and subsequently a 26.47% medication error rate. R89 On 9/23/2025 at 8:38 AM during observation of R89's medication administration, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) D withheld the following three medications from R89 without an order to do so: 1) Isosorbide Mononitrate Extended Release (ER) 30 mg 24-hour release, 2) Metoprolol Succinate ER 50 mg, and 3) Amiodarone 100 mg. Continued observation of R89's medication administration revealed the following three medications were not given because LPN D said they were not available: 4) Vitamin B-12 oral tablet, 5) Omega-3 1000 mg capsule, 6) Ferrous Sulfate 325 mg tablet. There was no attempt to search the medication cart, go to the medication room or back-up box, notify the nurse unit manager, pharmacy, or resident's physician of the missing medications.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-20 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 one (R89) of four residents reviewed for Medication Administration was free from a significant medication error resulting in R89 missing three doses of a prescribed inhaler; Tiotropium 2.5 MCG (microgram)/ACT (breath actuated) inhaler.Findings include:On 9/23/2025 at 8:38 AM, R89 was selected for observation of medication administration with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) D. During R89's medication reconciliation review it was determined the following Physician's order on 9/19/25 was not transcribed onto the Medication Administration Record; Tiotropium 2.5 MCG (microgram)/ACT (breath actuated) inhaler, 2 Inhalations by inhalation daily. R89 did not receive that medication for three consecutive days 9/20/25, 9/21/25, and 9/22/25. According to R89's Electronic Health Record (EHR) the resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and dementia. 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.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-22 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespreadEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide meals that were palatable for three residents (R7, R9 and R22) out of three resident that consumed meals in rooms, resulting in cold and visually unappealing foods. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents that consume food from the kitchen. Findings Include: R9 On 8/20/2024 at 11:20 AM, R9 was quiered about meals. R9 said, that he does not care for the food and often skips meals. R9 explained, sometimes the food is cold and it does not taste that good. Record review revealed R9 was admitted into facilty on 7/26/24 with a pertinent diagnosis of Type ll diabetes. According to Brief Interview for Mental Status, (BIMS) dated 8/1/24, R9 scored of 15 out of 15 (intact cognition). R22 On 8/20/2024 at 2:30 PM, R22 was interviewed and reported not being able to eat the food because it is cold. Record review revealed R22 was admitted into the facility on 7/12/24 with a pertinent diagnosis of necrotizing…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-22 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain functional equipment and a sanitary environment 1) Replace the floor carpeting of the halls on the first, second and third floor of the facility 2) Clean the ceiling air vents in three kitchenettes, 3) replace and or repair the broken heating system for resident's food and 4) Ensure functional water faucets were attached to the hand washing sinks properly. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all 69 residents in the facility. Findings include : On 8/20/24 at 9:00 A.M. through 8/22/24 at 3:20 P.M. the carpeting on the first, second and third floor was observed heavily soiled, stained and severely worn. Visible collections of dust and lint were noted around the edges of the flooring. On 8/22/24 at 11:08 A.M.Maintenance Director E was interviewed concerning the cleaning of the carpet and said his department was not responsible for cleaning of the carpet, however indicated the housekeeping department could address the concern. On 8/22/24 at 2:55 P.M. interview with Housekeeping Director C…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a clean and comfortable environment for one resident (R291) out of one resident reviewed for safe, clean, homelike environment resulting in resident dissatisfaction and a tripping hazard. Findings include: On 8/20/24 at 10:32 AM, R291 was observed in bed. When asked about living conditions in the facility R291 said there is a hole in the floor near my bed and my tray table keeps getting stuck in it. I'm afraid when I start to walk more, I will trip because of the hole. When asked if R291 reported the hole in the flooring to staff members R291 reported Yes, the faciltity is aware of it. There was an approximate four by eight-inch patch of missing floor covering observed near R291's bed. On 8/21/24 at 9:33 AM, R291 was observed sitting in a wheelchair next to bed with bedside table wheel resting in hole in the flooring. R291 demonstrated tipping bedside table in the hole in the flooring. Record review of R291's Electronic Health…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a toilet transfer for one resident (R291) of four residents reviewed who were dependent on staff for performance of activities of daily living (ADLs), resulting in unmet care needs and resident dissatisfaction. Findings include: On 8/21/24 at 1:08 PM, R291 was interviewed about care in the facility and stated, The aide last night Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) H told me I couldn't use the toilet and to pee on myself instead. So, I wet myself. It's embarrassing and I'm upset. R291 was observed crying and stated, I can use the toilet with help, but she didn't want to help me. Record review of R291's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed admission to the facility on 8/16/2024 with diagnoses which included muscle weakness and seizures. Review of R291's Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment performed on 8/19/24 revealed a BIMS of 15/15 intact cognition. Review of R291's Fall risk assessment dated [DATE] revealed 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 intakes MI00146255 and MI00146314. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for one resident (R77) out of one resident reviewed for elopement, resulting in the potential for heat exposure and being struck by a motor vehicle when R77 left an appointment unsupervised. Findings include: Record review of facility's Investigation Summary and Conclusion (no date), revealed R77 was taken to an appointment on 7/31/24 at approximately 8:30 AM via facility bus transportation. R77 was left unattended. At approximately 3:51 PM the facility was made aware that R77 was not present for pick-up. Further review revealed that R77 was found at 8:30 PM and returned to the hospital. Record review of R77's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed admission into the facility on 7/8/24 with a pertinent diagnosis of aphasia following a cerebral infarction (unable to comprehend language related to a stroke). According to the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS)…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 three residents (R4, R18, and R25) out of five residents reviewed for immunizations were provided pneumococcal and influenza vaccination and education, resulting in the potential for development and spread of influenza and pneumonia among vulnerable residents in the facility. Findings include: On 8/22/2024 at 10:08 AM the Infection Preventionist (IP) D was interviewed and reported the following residents R4 and R18 did not have documentation of a current pneumococcal immunization or refusal and R25 did not have documentation of current influenza immunization or refusal. Review of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) for R4 revealed admission to the facility on 5/10/2024 with diagnosis of dementia and cerebral infarction (stroke). Further review of EHR revealed R4 did not have documentation to indicate that the pneumococcal vaccine was offered or was contraindicated. Review of the EHR for R18 revealed admission into the facility on 6/20/2024 with diagnosis of muscle weakness and dementia. Further review of EHR 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.
Show the remaining 8 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 two residents (R4 and R18) out of five residents reviewed for immunizations were provided Covid-19 vaccinations and education resulting in the potential for development and spread of Covid-19 among vulnerable residents in the facility. Findings include: On 8/22/2024 at 10:08 AM the Infection Preventionist (IP) D was interviewed and reported the following residents R4 and R18 did not have documentation of a current Covid-19 immunization or refusal. Review of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) for R4 revealed admission into the facility on 5/10/2024 with diagnosis of dementia and cerebral infarction (stroke). Further review of EHR revealed R4 did not have documentation to indicate that the Covid-19 vaccine was offered or was contraindicated. Review of the EHR for R18 revealed admission into the facility on 6/20/2024 with diagnosis of muscle weakness and dementia. Further review of EHR revealed R18 did not have documentation to indicate that the Covid-19 vaccine was offered or was contraindicated. On 8/22/2024 at 1:12…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 numbers MI00143709. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide scheduled showers for two residents (R506 and R508) out of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's), resulting in the potential for unmet hygiene needs, loss of dignity, and emotional distress. Findings include: R506 Review of an admission Record revealed, R506 readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnosis which included Dementia and Multiple Fractures of Pelvis. R506 was discharged to the hospital on 5/2/24. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated of 4/19/24 revealed R506 had cognitive impairment with a Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 out of 15. Review of a bathing task revealed, R506 had no documented showers or bed baths for the last 30 days (April 2024). Review of the 1st floor shower schedule revealed, R506's scheduled showers days were Wednesday and Saturday on the 6-2 shift. On 5/2/24 at 12:41p.m., R506 and R508's…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-07 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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 MI00142789. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform family of a fall for one resident (R603) of six residents reviewed for falls. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed, R603 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included chronic atrial fibrillation and abnormalities of gait and mobility. R603's family was listed as the emergency contact. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed R603 had no cognitive impairment with a Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, out of a total possible score of 15. Review of a progress note with a date of 2/17/24 at 2:23 p.m., revealed Around 1:50 PM, assigned CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) reported to writer that resident told her that he fell. CNA did not observed resident on the floor, he was in bed, and call light on. Writer went in with co-worker, alert and oriented with periods of confusion, checked resident skin, no new skin…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2023-08-07 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — widespreadMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
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 an effective pest control program to ensure that the facility is free of pests resulting in an increased potential for contamination of food, both food and non-food contact surfaces, and foodborne illness potentially affecting staff, visitors and all 59 residents. Findings include: On 8/1/23 at 10:12 AM, four live flies were observed in the kitchen's dishwashing area. On 8/1/23 at 10:19 AM, seven live flies were observed near the kitchen's janitors closet and waste receptacle holding area. Upon observation the surveyor inquired with Dining Director, staff D on the current state of the insects in this area to which they responded, I think they come in when they take out the trash and the doors are open. It's usually not too bad. On 8/1/23 at 10:21 AM, the surveyor requested the facility's pest control policy to review to which staff D responded, I am not the best one talk to about that, but I will make sure that we will get what we have to you. On 8/1/23 at 11:06 AM, two live flies were observed near…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
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 (1.) properly monitor the temperature of one medication storage refrigerator out of two refrigerators reviewed for medication storage, (2.) properly date two opened insulin pens stored in the medication cart, and (3.) failed to ensure an unopened insulin pen was refrigerated as indicated per manufacturer's instructions for one medication cart out of three medication carts reviewed for medication storage, resulting in the potential to administer unsafe, ineffective, and outdated medications. Findings include: During an observation and interview on 8/2/2023 at approximately 9:18 a.m., the first-floor medication storage room refrigerator was observed with thick ice covering the top where ice trays were to be stored. RNM (Registered Nurse Manager) I confirmed midnight shift nurses were to monitor the refrigerator's temperature every night, log it on the temperature log, and thaw out the refrigerator freezer. After reviewing the temperature log, RNM I indicated that there was an out-of-range documented temperature…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-07 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to Intake #MI00133266. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the court appointed legal guardian/family member before discharging out of the facility for one resident (R325) out of three residents reviewed for discharge, resulting in the guardian/family being unaware of where their loved one was relocated and not being involved in the discharge planning. Findings include: Review of the clinical record for Resident #325 (R325) revealed the resident was admitted into the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 11/27/22 with diagnoses that included pneumonia, metabolic encephalopathy, hypertension, respiratory failure, and a history of falls. According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], R325 was moderately cognitively impaired and required assistance with Activities of Daily Living. Review of the Order Regarding Appointment of Temporary Legal Guardian of Incapacitated Individual, provided by the facility during the survey, revealed that Guardian C…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to assess the effectiveness of administered anti-diarrheal medication and communicate incidents of loose stools/diarrhea for one resident (R32) of one resident reviewed for diarrhea/constipation, resulting in resident frustration and incidents of loose stools/diarrhea going untreated. Findings include: During an interview on 8/1/2023 at 12:30 PM, when Resident #32 (R32) was queried if diarrhea or constipation was a concern, she said she had diarrhea. R32 added the nurse gave her a pill for it. R32 said when the diarrhea continued and she requested another pill, none was provided. A review of R32's clinical record documented an admission date of 4/8/2021 with diagnoses that included heart disease, spinal stenosis, and peripheral vascular disease. A Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented intact cognition and total physical dependence on staff for toilet use. A review of physician orders documented to provide Anti-Diarrheal 2 gm tab, one…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-07 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 secure indwelling catheter tubing for one resident (R40) of three residents reviewed for urinary catheters, resulting in the potential for genital trauma. Findings include: In an observation on 8/1/23 at 10:20 a.m., Resident #40 (R40) laid in bed and had a urinary catheter. Tea colored urine was observed in the tubing. Review of an admission record revealed, R40 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnosis of a right humerus fracture and right and left pelvic fractures. Review of a Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 7/30/23, revealed R40 was cognitively impaired and required an indwelling catheter. In an observation and interview on 8/3/23 at 8:30 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) B was observed performing ADL care for R40. CNA B stated, The foley isn't attached (anchored) to his leg and the catheter bag is on the floor. CNA B said R40 should have an anchor or leg strap on the catheter and the catheter bag…
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.
“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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ATIED ASSOCIATES — 12 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 1.8 | +2.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.2 | +1.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 1.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.8★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FIRO OPERATOR LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 40% | since 09/30/2021 |
| SAGE OPERATIONS MI LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 60% | since 09/30/2021 |
| AV PARTNERS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/30/2021 |
| SAGE HC PARTNERS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/30/2021 |
| TENNENBAUM, SAMUEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/30/2021 |
| SCOTT, HEATHER | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 09/30/2021 |
| SATT, AVRAHAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 05/04/2021 |
4 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 $7.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% 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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Michigan Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 235593. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-20, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.