The Orchards at Douglas Cove

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

38.2% 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 39 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 52.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 23 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 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 20% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 51 beds and averages 44.0 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.58 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.14 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 3.08 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.78 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.45 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 49% 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

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.

29 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 19 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2026-03-05 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician of a significant change in 1 (Resident #102) of 3 residents reviewed for notification, resulting in the physician not evaluating Resident #102 when she experienced a significant weight gain, swelling of her legs, decreased functional abilities, and hospitalization.Findings include:Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #102 was a [AGE] year-old female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: unspecified atrial fibrillation (a common, often rapid irregular heart rhythm where the heart's upper chambers beat chaotically which can cause blood clots, stroke and heart failure).Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #102 with a reference date of 1/23/26, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment score of 15/15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. In an interview on 3/4/26 at 3:09pm, Resident #102 reported on 2/10/26 she…

  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 · Dcited before2026-03-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to promptly identify a change in condition for 1 (Resident #102) of 3 residents reviewed for quality of care, resulting in Resident #102 experiencing unmanaged pain and swelling in her legs, decreased functional ability, frustration, and a 3-day hospitalization for treatment of her symptoms.Findings include:Resident #102Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #102 was a [AGE] year-old female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: unspecified atrial fibrillation (a common, often rapid irregular heart rhythm where the heart's upper chambers beat chaotically which can cause blood clots, stroke and heart failure).Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #102 with a reference date of 1/23/26, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment score of 15/15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Review of section GG of the MDS 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake #2593174 and #2604697.Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received the necessary care and services (assessment, monitoring, and treatments) for PICC line (a long, thin tube inserted through a vein in the arm for long-term IV (intravenous) access to administer antibiotic medication) and non-pressure wounds for 2 of 6 residents (Resident #101 & #104) reviewed for quality of care, resulting in infection and the potential for worsening of medical conditions. Findings include:Resident #101Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #101 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: infective endocarditis (infection of the inside of the heart). Resident #101 transferred to a different skilled nursing facility on 8/28/25.In an interview on 9/2/25 at 11:00 AM, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A explained that they had recently discovered that Resident #101 had not received adequate…

  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 · D2025-09-05 · 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 Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide quality care and treatment for pressure ulcers, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 resident (Resident #103) of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcer prevention and treatment, resulting in the potential for worsening of pressure wounds, and overall deterioration in health status. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #103 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: acquired absence (amputation) of left and right leg below the knee and fractures of the spine. In an observation and interview on 9/3/25 at 10:37 AM in Resident #103's room with CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) I preparing to provided incontinence care. Observed a large dressing bordered with adhesive on the sacrum (tailbone) dated 9/2/25; the dressing was not fully intact on the bottom edge. Observed a bright red wound on the right buttock with a dark red center and…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-09-05 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake #2593174 & 2604697. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide necessary oxygen and CPAP (a device that delivers continuous positive airway pressure to ensure airway stays open during sleep) per physician orders and maintain oxygen tubing according to the standards of practice for 2 residents (Resident #101 & #104) of 4 residents reviewed for respiratory care, resulting in the potential for respiratory distress, the development and spread of respiratory infection and disease, and the exacerbation of respiratory conditions. Findings include: Resident #101Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #101 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (blocks airflow and makes it hard to breathe).Review of Resident #101's admission Assessment dated 8/6/25 indicated that he used oxygen and a CPAP. The settings for these were not noted. Review of Resident…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain best practices in accordance with professional standards of food service safety. This deficient practice has the potential to result in food borne illness among all residents that consume food from the kitchen.Findings Include: On 07/15/2025 at 9:16 AM, An initial tour of the kitchen found an increased accumulation of spillage and white flakey debris on the back portion of the floor and floor juncture of the walk-in cooler. On 7/15/2025 at 9:26 AM, Observation of the ventilation hood over the cook line found an accumulation of dust and debris on the filters. When asked when the hoods were cleaned lasts, a sticker on the system stated it was last serviced in March of 2025. When asked if facility staff take them down and clean them, Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) E stated, we don't take them down. Further observation of the convection oven found an accumulation of debris on top of the oven. On 7/15/2025 at 9:38 AM, Observation of five clean utensil drawers found an accumulation of crumbs and debris…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation contains two deficient practice statements, A & B.Deficient Practice Statement (DPS) ABased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to effectively implement effective infection control measures which included Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) per facility policy and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, in 5 of 5 residents (Resident #27, #51, #2, #19, & #17) reviewed for infection control, resulting in the potential for cross-contamination and the development and spread of infection to a vulnerable population. DPS B Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have an active and ongoing plan for reducing the risk of Legionella and other opportunistic pathogens of premise plumbing (OPPP). This deficient practice has the increased potential to result in waterborne pathogens to exist and spread in the facility's plumbing system and an increased risk of respiratory infection among any or all the residents in the facility.…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop comprehensive resident focused care plans based on the comprehensive assessment for 4 residents (Resident #2, #36, #6 and #16) of 12 residents reviewed for care plans, resulting in the potential for unidentified care needs. Findings include:Resident #2: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #2 was a female with pertinent diagnoses which included presence of PEG Tube (A feeding tube inserted through the abdominal wall directly into the stomach), moderate severe oral and moderate pharyngeal dysphagia (noticeable and frequent swallowing difficulties with the potential for aspiration (food or liquid entering the airway). Review of Order dated 7/8/25, revealed, .Enhanced Barrier Precautions for PEG Tube . Review of current “Care Plan” for Resident #2, revealed no focus or interventions for Enhanced Barrier Precautions due to the PEG tube, nor a care plan focus and interventions for Resident #2's peg tube. In an interview on 07/17/2025 at…

  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 · E2025-07-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  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

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to minimize the risk of scalding and burns by allowing domestic hot water to exceed 120 F. This resulted in an increased risk of injury among residents in the facility.Findings Include: On 07/15/25 at 2:19 PM, observation of the boiler room, with Maintenance Director D, found outgoing hot water temperatures to the hall were observed at 118F, and the returning temperature was 110F. On 07/15/25 at 2:36 PM, observation and interview of the hand sink in the C hall shower room, found the hot water reached 130F while using a rapid read thermometer. When asked about taking regular water temperatures, MD D stated he has an assistant that takes the temperatures. On 07/15/25 at 2:40 PM, observation of the C hall dining room sink found the hot water reached 127.5F when tested with a rapid read digital thermometer. On 07/15/25 at 3:00 PM, observation of the N-hall spa found that both hand sinks had hot water that reached 127F when using a rapid read thermometer. When asked what type of thermometer is used by the facility to take hot water…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-17 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolated
  Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
  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 failed to inform the resident's responsible party in advance and schedule meetings to participate in the formulation of care plans with relevant disciplines (nursing, dietary, social services, and activities) related to assessed healthcare needs for 1 (Resident #16) of 12 sampled residents reviewed for notification of care planning resulting in ineffective communication and the potential for unmet care needs. Findings include:Resident #16 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #16 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included wernickes encephalopathy (brain and memory disorder caused by lack of vitamin B1) and restlessness and agitation. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #16, with a reference date of 7/8/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11/15 which indicated Resident #16 was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of Resident #16's Care Conference…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE ORCHARDS MICHIGAN — 15 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $952K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% 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