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

West Oaks Senior Care & Rehab Center

22355 W Eight Mile Rd, Detroit, MI 48219 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 102 certified beds · (313) 255-6450 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (313) 255-6450 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0610) — cited Dec 2023
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
7800 W Outer Dr · (313) 543-6200 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
17364 Lahser Rd · (313) 532-5920 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
20727 7 Mile Rd W · (313) 592-9115 · Call to confirm hours
Park
17629 Vaughan St · (313) 307-0796 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
17377 Westbrook St · (248) 871-7540

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 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 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased4.7%10.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight10.1%5.4%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms5.3%4.3%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained2.9%0.1%0.1%worse
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.1%3.0%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened1.9%12.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.1%19.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.6%5.1%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control1.5%20.0%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table10.2%14.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.3%1.1%1.4%typical
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine68.1%79.5%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission32.8%24.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit14.4%11.7%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.271.841.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.631.641.80typical

§ 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.

50.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 31 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
59.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 59.1% 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 22 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 37% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 44% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF50.3%CMS range 33.7–68.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.1%CMS range 6.4–13.110.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge59.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge50.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge50.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.9%CMS range 3.5–12.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.821.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.40
RN hours/ resident / day
1.18
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.12
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.70
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.25
RN hoursweekends
55.3%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 102 beds and averages 99.1 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.70 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.40 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 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 3.40 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-06-25)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-27)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-16 · 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

    This citation pertains to intake 2680585 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for one vulnerable resident (R101) of five residents reviewed for supervision, resulting in a resident being left alone during an outside appointment and the potential for injury. Findings include: On 12/15/25 at 9am, record review of order dated 10/14/25 revealed R101 was to have an appointment on 11/19/25 at 12:30 pm with a pickup time at 11:30 am.On 12/15/25 at 2:30pm, R101 and Family Member G were interviewed regarding the incident at the facility. Family Member G explained that R101 has a traumatic brain injury and was taken to a medical appointment far away and left unsupervised for hours. Family Member G stated that the family would have accompanied R101 had they known about the appointment. On 12/16/25 at 9 am, record review revealed an admission date of 4/24/25 with diagnosis that included the following: acute respiratory failure, sepsis, staphylococcus aureus, acute embolism, thrombosis of unspecified femoral vein, anemia, Congestive Heart…

    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 · D2025-06-25 · tag F0711 — isolated
    Ensure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Physician/Physician Extender progress notes were entered into the clinical record in a timely manner for one resident (R35) of 19 resident's reviewed for Physician/Physician Extender progress notes. Findings include: On 6/24/25 at 8:42 AM, R35's Electronic Health Record (EHR) was reviewed for Physician/Physician Extender notes and revealed there were no Physician/Physician Extender notes found in the EHR since 12/2024. On 6/24/25 at 12:57 PM, Physician/Physician Extender practitioner notes were requested. Record review of the EHR revealed R35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis that included cerebral infarction (stroke) and attending physician listed as Medical Doctor (MD) F. On 6/24/25 at 3:25 PM, Nurse Practitioner (NP) E was interviewed and stated, I work with (MD F) and provided the care to (R35), but I did not provide notes in the medical chart. It was my mistake. The notes should be put in when the visit occurs. 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-25 · 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 maintain infection control practices for two of five residents (R47 and R22) reviewed for respiratory care by not ensuring respiratory equipment was stored in a sanitary manner. This failure had the potential to expose residents to harmful microorganisms and increase the risk of infection. Findings include: On 6/23/25 at 2:00 PM, during an observation of R47's room, a nebulizer mask was noted on the bedside table uncovered and exposed to air. The mask was not stored in a protective covering. On 6/23/25 at 2:05 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A entered the room. When queried, about the storage of the nebulizer mask, LPN A said it should be in a plastic bag. Record review noted that R47 was admitted on [DATE] with a pertinent diagnosis of respiratory failure with hypoxia and dependence on supplemental oxygen. Record review revealed R47's Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated a 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intakes MI00151575 and MI00151833. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure proper positioning during care for one resident (R902) out of three residents reviewed for falls, resulting in R902 falling from bed and obtaining a large hematoma (blood filled bruise) with extensive bruising of the face. Findings include: The State Agency received an allegation that R902 had fell out of bed during care resulting in injuries. Review of R902's electronic medical records (EMR) revealed admission into the facility on 2/17/23 with a pertinent diagnosis of hemiplegia (paralysis) and hemiparesis (paralysis) following a cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting left non-dominant side. Review of R902's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], it was documented resident required partial/minimal assist with bed mobility. Review of R902's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) dated 2/20/25, R902 scored 12 out of 15 (moderate cognitive impairment). Review of ADL Care Plan 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake MI00147802. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent an elopement for one resident (R301) out of four residents reviewed for elopement, resulting in R301 exiting from the facility without staff knowledge and the potential for injury for the resident. Findings include: On 12/05/2024 at 10:00 a.m., an investigation was conducted regarding a facility reported incident dated 10/20/2024. The facility's investigation report revealed in part: .on 10/20/2024 At about 8:00 p.m., R301's assigned nurse (Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A went to provide the resident with his evening medication and medication could not be administered because she could not locate the resident. R301's room was checked and all surrounding common areas. Nursing staff immediately called security and code Green alert for missing person protocol was initiated. A total head count of all residents was conducted and only R301 was not accounted for . The resident traveled approximately twelve…

    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 · D2024-05-07 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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 MI00143663. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly assess bilateral heel wounds for one resident (R404) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcer prevention/intervention, resulting in the potential for the worsening of wounds. Findings include: On 5/7/24 at 11:58 AM R404 was observed lying in bed with loosely wrapped bandages on both feet. R404's heels were not completely covered revealing black dried scabs on both heels. R404's feet were observed to be dry, cracked, and dead skin was seen flaking off their feet onto the mattress. R404's feet were positioned directly on the mattress, there were no pressure relieving devices observed. On 5/7/24 at 12:01 PM Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) A was asked if the bandages could be observed. CNA A lifted R404's heels. R404's bandages began to unravel onto the mattress and there was no date found on the bandaging. On 5/7/24 at 1:11 PM Wound Care Nurse (WCN) B was interviewed regarding…

    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 before2023-12-05 · 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

    This citation pertains to #MI00140569. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two residents (R107 amd R108) out of four residents reviewed for infection control, received proper COVID-19 testing following a COVID-19 outbreak in the facility, resulting in the potential for spread of COVID-19 throughout the building. Findings include: It was reported to the State Agency that staff were not following proper infection control/prevention guidelines. On 12/5/23 beginning at 11:03 AM, Infection Preventionist (IP) G was queried about COVID-19 testing conducted in the facility following a recent COVID outbreak. IP G said the recent COVID-19 outbreak began on 10/6/23 when Resident #105 (R105) tested positive. IP G said they tested residents complaining of COVID symptoms and residents who were exposed to COVID-19. IP G indicated they did COVID testing on the first day, third day, and fifth day. The IP G said he was off on 10/6/23 and did not return to work until the following week. On 12/5/23 beginning at 11:37 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-05 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    This citation pertains to MI00140144. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to submit documentation of a completed investigation of an alleged incident of resident-to-resident abuse in a timely manner to the State Agency for two residents (R101 and R102), out of three residents reviewed for abuse, resulting in the potential delay for opportunities to implement corrective measures and interventions. Findings include: A facility self-reported incident (FRI) was received by the State Agency (SA) on 8/20/23 at 3:59 PM. The FRI documented that on 8/20/23 at approximately 1:30 PM, a nurse heard shouting coming from the [NAME] Hall. The shouting was coming from Room XX. Upon further investigation, Resident #101 (R101) was hollering at Resident #102 (R102) to get out of his house. R102 was observed standing over R101. R102 was escorted out of the room by the nurse to calm him down. Both residents were interviewed. R101 alleged that R102 hit him in the chest, however the nurse observed R102 holding R101's arm. Both residents were involved in an alleged, unwitnessed…

    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 · D2023-09-18 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake MI00139131, Based on interview and record review the facility failed to inform the resident's representative of a change in condition for three (R601, R602, and R605) of five residents reviewed for change in condition, resulting in the resident's representative not being informed of the resident's physical and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: R601 Review of R601's medical record revealed admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses of hemiplegia and hemiparesis (weakness) affecting the right dominant side, hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting non dominant side and diabetes mellitus. Responsible party power of attorney care conference person and emergency contact #1 listed as Family Member B. On 9/18/23 at 9:10 AM, during an interview Family Member B stated that R601 had multiple falls in the facility and that R601's care was not adequate. Family Member B reported that upon visiting R601 on 8/16/23 R601 complained of right leg pain and observed a bruise 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-07-27 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespread
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview the facility failed to consistently ensure the services of a Registered Nurse (RN) for eight consecutive hours per day, seven days per week, resulting in the potential for unmet care needs for all residents who reside in the facility. Findings include: Review of master schedules provided for Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for the past 60 days revealed, the facility did not have eight consecutive hours of RN coverage on the following days: Saturday: 6/10/23 Saturday: 6/24/23 Sunday: 6/25/23 Saturday: 7/1/23 Sunday: 7/2/23 Monday: 7/4/23 Sunday: 7/9/23 In an interview on 7/27/23 at 12:51 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) reported they did not have an RN everyday. The DON was unsure of why the facility did not have eight hour consecutive RN coverage. Regional Clinical Director (RCD) RN A reported the former Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) was employed as the RN five days a week from 5/22/23 - 7/7/23. In an interview on 7/27/23 at 2:21 p.m., RCD A and MDS Nurse B acknowledged that there was not 8 hour RN coverage on 6/10, 6/24, 6/25, 7/1, 7/2,…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 5 citations
  • Potential for harm · F2023-07-27 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespread
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    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 consistent proper working order of the facility reach-in freezer which had the potential to affect all residents that eat from the kitchen. Findings include: During the initial tour of the kitchen on 7/24/2023 beginning at 8:54 AM with Dietary Manager (DM) F the internal temperature of the reach-in freezer was observed to be 20 ºF (Fahrenheit). A four-ounce cup of ice cream stored in the freezer was observed soft, not frozen solid. DM F said the temperature of the freezer should be zero or below. A review of a facility policy titled, Food Storage, received during the survey, documented in part the following, Frozen foods must be maintained at a temperature to keep the food frozen solid. Freezer temperatures should be checked at least two times each day. Check for proper functioning of the unit at the same time. Periodically, check the firmness of foods in the freezer to assure temperatures are maintained to keep food frozen solid . A review of the 2013 FDA Food Code revealed the following: - Section…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-27 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure hypertensive medication (Carvedilol) was properly administered for one resident (R4), resulting in a medication being left at the bedside. Findings include: During an observation and interview on 7/24/2023 at 9:58 AM, Resident #4 (R4) was observed awake and in his room. A clear plastic medication cup containing a white pill was observed on R4's overbed table. R4 said he did not know what the pill was for but was waiting on breakfast to be served so that he would have some liquid available to take the pill. During an observation and interview on 7/24/2023 at 10:00 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) G was shown the pill in R4's room and stated, He should not have it at his bedside. LPN G identified the pill as Carvedilol. A review of the admission Record for R4 documented an admission date of 6/9/2023 with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease, diabetes mellitus-type 2, and hypertensive heart disease with heart failure. 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-27 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide appropriate tracheostomy (surgical opening through the neck to help oxygen reach the lungs) care or have emergency supplies readily available for one resident (R57) reviewed for tracheostomy care resulting in the potential for inadequate oxygenation and respiratory infection. Findings include: On 7/24/23 at 9:33 AM, R57 was observed in bed with a tracheostomy (trach) collar (soft plastic mask that fits over and around the tracheostomy tube) secured around the neck with a T-bar (T- shaped) connecter attached to the trach. One end of the T-bar connector had corrugated tubing directly attached to an oxygen machine with humidification. The other end of the T- bar connecter had a blue cap over it. The trach collar indicated the inner canula was a size 6.5 mm (millimeter). A trach kit/box identification #6UN75H was taped on the wall inside a clear plastic bag with 'emergency trach' written on it. The 'emergency trach' box was opened and did not contain an inner canula tube. R57 was unable to be interviewed…

    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 · D2023-07-27 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolated
    Provide or obtain dental services for each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow-up with dental recommendation for one resident with Medicaid benefits (R34) reviewed for dental services resulting in R34 not having several broken/decayed teeth extracted and the potential for tooth pain, tooth abscess, and difficulty eating. Findings include: On 7/24/23 at 10:11 AM R34 was observed in a room seated on the bed with several visible broken and decayed teeth. During interview R34 pointed to the left side of his mouth and said he gets tooth pain now and again, but not at this time. R34 said he saw a dentist and, was supposed to get some teeth pulled, but don't know what happened with that. According to the Electronic Health Record (EHR) R34 was admitted to the facility with medicaid benefits and had multiple diagnoses that included impaired coordination after a hemorrhage of the brain and vascular dementia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R34 had intact cognition with a BIMS (brief interview for…

    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 · D2023-07-27 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
    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 food items listed as always available were on hand to ensure resident food preferences were honored for one resident (R67) of one resident reviewed for food preferences, resulting in resident dissatisfaction with the dining experience. Findings include: During an interview on 7/25/2023 at 9:31 AM, Resident #67 (R67) was awake and sitting in his room. R67 stated, The food could be a whole lot better. I ordered a hot dog and chicken noodle soup, and they told me they didn't have any. A review of a document posted on an informational bulletin board on R67's housing unit during the survey was titled, Always Available Menu. The always available menu items included in part the following: hot dog, chicken tenders, chicken noodle soup, and tater tots. During an observation and interview on 7/25/2023 at 3:35 PM with Dietary Manager (DM) F, the following items were not in stock in the kitchen: chicken tenders, tater tots, and hot dogs. DM F…

    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

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to NEXCARE HEALTH SYSTEMS — 20 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.8+1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.4+1.6 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.8-0.8 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.4-0.4 vs chain
The other 19 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
NEXCARE HOLDINGS, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 11/01/2013
GARDNER, ROSEMARYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 08/03/2018
SANGSTER, TODDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/04/2013
NEXCARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2005
PERRY, MICHAELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2015

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.

$10.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-7.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$866K
Related-party expense8% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 87%Medicare 3%Other / private 10%

About 87% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $866K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$372per resident / day
operating cost
$11,299per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$345per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Michigan Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Michigan
$11,254/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$11,969/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,818/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 235374. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-25, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next