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

Medilodge of Port Huron

5635 Lakeshore, Fort Gratiot, MI 48059 · For profit - Individual · 127 certified beds · (810) 385-7447 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (810) 385-7447 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Feb 2023
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

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 harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (23% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2023
  • about 26% 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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3050 Commerce Dr · (810) 385-4441 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
4845 24th Ave · (810) 385-7747 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
4985 24th Ave · (810) 525-1968 · Call to confirm hours
Park
3325 Metcalf Rd · (810) 989-6960 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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 held steady at 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 increased4.4%10.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.5%5.4%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.5%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms6.1%4.3%6.5%typical
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.4%3.0%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened3.2%12.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication28.7%19.4%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.1%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.9%5.1%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control25.2%20.0%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table6.5%14.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.3%79.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.6%24.0%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit3.1%11.7%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.741.841.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.511.641.80better

§ 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.

53.2% 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 134 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

53.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
75.5%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
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 75.5% 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 53 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 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 36% 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 SNF53.2%CMS range 45.6–60.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.5%CMS range 6.2–13.810.7%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 discharge75.5%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 discharge52.8%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 discharge71.7%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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 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 stay1.5%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 hospitalization7.6%CMS range 4.7–12.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.901.02Oct 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

0.90
RN hours/ resident / day
0.76
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.38
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.04
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.22
RN hoursweekends
22.9%
Total nursing turnover
21.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 127 beds and averages 118.6 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 8 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 4.04 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.90 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.38 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 3.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.37 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.18 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 23% is below 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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-21)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-05-02)

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.

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.

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-21 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for 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 apply a graded hand roll (hand splint used to assist with finger extension) and perform a range of motion (ROM) program for one resident (R74) of one resident reviewed for limited ROM. Findings include: On 5/19/25 at 11:39 AM, R74 was observed in bed with their right middle and ring fingers flexed unable to easily straighten. When asked if they wore a brace R74 stated, I have a thing for my hand, but no one is putting it on. At 2:00 PM, R74 was observed in bed not wearing a hand splint. On 5/20/25 at 10:30 AM, R74 was observed in bed not wearing a hand splint and confirmed no one has been in to work with their hand. Record review of R74's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed the most recent admission to the facility on 7/17/2023 with diagnoses that included contracture of unidentified muscle, generalized muscle weakness, and acquired absence of left hip joint. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for R74…

    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 · E2024-05-02 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor 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 ensure a clean environment affecting three residents (R51, R7, and R26) of six residents reviewed for environmental concerns. Findings include: R51 On 04/30/24 at 9:10 AM, R 51 was observed lying in bed in their room. R51's bed was observed adjacent to the wall, with a patch of peeling paint/cracks approximately the size of a basketball. On 05/01/24 at 9:09 AM, R51 was observed lying in bed and was asked about the peeling paint on the wall. R51 stated, Don't like it. A record review of R51's medical record revealed, R51 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dementia, Schizophrenia, and Unspecified Intellectual Disabilities. A review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] noted, R51's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, which indicates mild cognitive impairment. R7 On 04/30/24 at 9:25 AM, R7 was observed lying in bed in their room watching television. There was an area behind the head of the…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide showers per preference and schedule for one resident (R70) out of three reviewed for showers. Findings Include: On 5/2/2024 at 11:04 AM, R70 was observed sitting in their wheelchair. R70 was interviewed regarding receiving showers per schedule and when requested. R70 stated they do not always receive their showers as scheduled and when they do, the staff rush through them. A review of the medical record revealed that R70 admitted into the facility on 1/15/2024 with the following diagnoses, Pruritus and Anxiety Disorder. Further review of the Minimum Data Set assessment revealed a Brief Interview of Mental status score of 7/15 indicating an impaired cognition. R70 also required assistance with bed mobility and transfers. Further review of R70's shower documentation for March 2024 and April 2024 revealed that R70 did not receive a shower on the following days; 3/2, 3/6, 3/9, 3/13, 3/16, 3/20, 3/23, 3/27, 3/30, 4/4, 4/9, 4/16, 4/19, 4/23, 4/26, and 4/30/24. Documentation on these days revealed, Response…

    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 · D2024-05-02 · 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 label and date a (wound) dressing for one resident (R2) out of one reviewed for skin conditions. Finding include: On 4/30/2024 at 9:30 AM, R2 was observed sitting in their wheelchair. R2 was noted to have a dressing on their lower left leg. The dressing was not dated. R2 stated they have problems with their legs and the nurse's put dressings on them. R2 stated they have sores on their legs sometimes and they bleed. R2 was also noted to have cream on their feet and paper towels in their shoes. On 5/1/2024 at 10:05 AM and at 5/2/2024 at 9:07 AM, R2 was observed with an undated dressing to their lower left leg. The dressing appeared to be soiled. R2 stated the dressing has not been changed since I spoke to them on 4/30/2024. R2 stated they do not remember when it was last changed or when it was put on. A review of the medical record revealed that R2 admitted into the facility on 7/4/2023 with the following diagnoses, Cerebral Infarction 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 · D2024-05-02 · 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 has two deficient practice statements. Deficient practice statement one. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to secure an oxygen tank for one sampled resident (R46) of seven, reviewed for accidents. On 4/30/24 at 9:22 AM, R46's room was observed with an oxygen tank, that stood free on the floor, inside of a black bag (that clips to the wheelchair), and not in a secured carrier. On 5/01/24 at 9:25 AM, R46's room was observed with an oxygen tank, that was behind a positioning wedge. The tank was leaning against the wall inside of the black bag, and not in a secured carrier. On 5/02/24 at 9:22 AM, R46 was observed in their room and was not able to provide information regarding the oxygen tank due to cognitive impairment. R46's room was observed with the oxygen tank, that was behind a positioning wedge. The tank was leaning against the wall inside of the black bag, and not in a secured carrier. On 5/02/24 at 9:23 AM, Unit Manager A was asked and alerted about the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-02 · tag F0700 — isolated
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    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 assess and obtain consent for bed rails for one resident (R315) out of one reviewed for bed rails. Findings Include: On 4/30/2024 at 1:43 PM, R315 was observed laying in bed. R315 was noted to have full bed rails installed. R315 stated they do not use the bed rails for turning and repositioning. A review of the medical record revealed that R315 admitted into the facility with the following diagnoses, Lobar Pneumonia and Dementia. A review of the Minimum Data Set assessment revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status assessment of 9/15 indicating an impaired cognition. R315 also required assistance with bed mobility and transfers. Further review of the medical records did not reveal a consent or assessment for the used of the bed rails. On 5/2/2024 at 9:04 AM, an interview was conducted with the Registered Nurse (RN) D. RN D stated that when someone gets bed rails, they complete three assessments, and they obtain a consent. RN D stated R315 was not supposed to have bed rails and they had not been assessed 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 · D2024-05-02 · 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 (handling medication, proper storage of nebulizer mask, and wearing personal protective equipment [PPE] for contact isolation rooms) for two residents (R315 and R60) from a total sample of 35. Findings include: On 5/1/2024 at 6:32 AM, medication administration was completed with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) F. LPN F was observed taking a pill out of the medication cup with their hands without first performing hand hygiene or wearing gloves. On 5/2/2024 at 9:25 AM, medication administration was completed with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) G. LPN G was observed breaking a pill in half with their hands without first performing hand hygiene or wearing gloves. On 5/1/2024 at 11:00 AM, an interview was conducted with the Infection Control Preventionist (ICP). ICP stated the nurses should absolutely complete hand hygiene and should not handle anything going in someone's mouth without gloves. R315 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-15 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of 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 maintain a call light within reach for four (R2, R34, R102, R106) of 24 sampled residents, resulting in impaired resident access to requesting and receiving assistance in a timely manner. Findings include: R2 Review of the facility record for R2 revealed an admission date of [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, Schizophrenia and Traumatic brain injury. Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated R2 required primarily set-up to supervision assistance from staff for self care and mobility. Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score was 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. On [DATE] at 11:00 AM, R2 was initially interviewed in their room. There was no call light visible in the room and the call light wall jack was empty. No hand bell or other call light alternative was observed. On [DATE] at 10:30 AM, No call light was observed in R2's room. R2 was asked about the lack of a call light in the room and stated,…

    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 · D2023-02-15 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    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 accurate advance directive information was in place for two residents (R5 and and R47) of two reviewed for advance directives (legal documents that allow a person to identify decisions about end-of-life care ahead of time), resulting in the potential for a resident's preferences for medical care to not be followed by the facility, or other healthcare providers. Findings Include: R5 On 2/13/23 at 2:50 PM, a record review was completed for R5 and the advanced directive on file was observed to be incomplete. A review of the form titled Advance Directives/Medical Treatment Decisions Acknowledgement of Receipt. noted, This is to acknowledge that I have been informed, in writing and in a language that I understand, of my rights and all rules and regulations regarding decision concerning medical care, including: the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment. The right to formulate and to issues Advance Directives to be followed should I become incapacitated. (Box Checked) I have chosen to formulate and issue…

    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 · D2023-02-15 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake MI00128730. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect a resident's (R89) right to be free from physical abuse by another resident (R373), resulting in the resident getting hit on the shoulder and subsequent feelings of anxiety and psychosocial distress. Findings Include: A review of a Facility Reported Incident (FRI) dated 5/12/2022 revealed the following: Investigation: The incident was not witnessed by staff. Staff answered [R89] call light and [R89] reported that [R373] had hit [them] in the shoulder. A review of the R89's medical record revealed that the resident admitted into the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Pain, and Major Depressive Disorder. A review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12/15 indicating moderately impaired cognition. R89 also required extensive two-person assist with transfers. On 2/14/2023 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-15 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide follow-up to the PASARR (preadmission screening/annual resident review) form 3877 for two residents (R24 and R77) of three reviewed for PASARR concerns, resulting in the potential for unmet care needs. Findings Include: R77 A review of the medical record revealed that R77 admitted into the facility on 9/23/19 and readmitted on [DATE] with the following diagnoses, Bipolar Disorder, Psychotic Disorder with Delusions, and Schizophrenia. A review of the physician orders revealed that R77 was currently prescribed the following medications, Prozac (antidepressant), Seroquel (antipsychotic), Zyprexa (Antipsychotic), and Ativan(Antianxiety). A review of R77's documents revealed the following Annual Resident Review (ARR) revealed that questions 1-4 were checked yes for Mental Illness and Dementia. Further review of the ARR noted the following, Distribution: If any answer to items 1-6 in SECTION II is Yes, send ONE copy to the local…

    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 · D2023-02-15 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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 care plans were revised to reflect the current needs and condition of the resident for four sampled residents (R98, R102, R173, R375) of 24 residents whose care plans were reviewed, resulting in and the potential for unmet care needs. Findings include: R98 On 02/13/23 at 12:50 PM, R98 was observed to be in bed laying on their back with the head of the bed up around 30-45 degrees. R98 reported poor control of their urine when they had to go. R98 verbalized they were often incontinent and would have to call staff to come in and change their incontinence brief. R98 then reported they were currently wet and had told staff, and staff said they would change them before lunch. Staff was not observed to provide care prior to R98 having received their lunch. R98 further mentioned that when they were admitted into the facility they had a tube into their bladder (indwelling urinary catheter-tube into the bladder to collect urine) to help them…

    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 · D2023-02-15 · 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 MI00133768. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure interventions to prevent the development of pressure ulcers were implemented for one resident (R102) of four reviewed for skin conditions, resulting in the potential for skin breakdown. Findings include: On 2/13/23 at 9:21 AM, R102 was observed asleep in bed. Two green protective heel boots were observed sitting in a chair near R102's bed and night stand. An observation of R102's feet revealed R102 was also wearing heel protector boots on their feet. On 2/14/23 at 9:27 AM, R102 was observed in bed. R102's was observed with a wedge under their knees but with their feet laying on the ma. The green heel boots were observed on the floor next to the bed. On 2/14/23 at 2:46 PM, R102 was observed in bed, and the boots remained on the floor and not on R102's feet. RN D walked by the room and was asked when R102 is to have the boots on and stated, We should have them (resident's feet) floated (off…

    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 · D2023-02-15 · tag F0887 — isolated
    Educate 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to verify eligibility for and obtain consent (from legal guardian) prior to administering a COVID-19 vaccine for one resident (R24) of five reviewed for immunizations, resulting in the potential for residents and/or resident representatives to not be fully informed of the benefits and potential risks associated with the COVID-19 vaccine. Findings include: A review of R24's medical record and Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that the resident was admitted into the facility on 9/20/21 and most recently re-admitted on [DATE]. R24 was assessed to have a moderately impaired cognition with medical diagnoses of Stroke, Dementia, Anxiety, Depression, and Psychotic Disorder. Further review revealed that the resident requires extensive assistance from staff for most activities of daily living (ADLs). R24's record indicated that the resident has a legal guardian who is responsible for making their medical and financial decisions. On 2/14/23 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
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 MEDILODGE — 53 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 53.1+1.9 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 52.7+2.3 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 53.7+1.3 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.0+1.0 vs chain
The other 52 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
1 of 5Medilodge of FarmingtonFarmington, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Grand BlancGrand Blanc, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Grand RapidsGrand Rapids, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of HowellHowell, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of MarshallMarshall, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Montrose IncMontrose, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of MunisingMunising, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Sault Ste. MarieSault Ste. Marie, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of SouthfieldSouthfield, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of WestwoodKalamazoo, MI 2 of 5Medilodge at the ShoreGrand Haven, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of Capital AreaLansing, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of CheboyganCheboygan, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of East LansingEast Lansing, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of FrankenmuthFrankenmuth, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of GTCTraverse City, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of KalamazooKalamazoo, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of LudingtonLudington, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of St. ClairEast China, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of Sterling HeightsSterling Heights, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of West BloomfieldWest Bloomfield, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of Campus AreaEast Lansing, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of HillmanHillman, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of LivingstonHowell, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of LivoniaLivonia, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of Mt. PleasantMt. Pleasant, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of PortagePortage, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of ShorelineSterling Heights, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of Tawas CityTawas City, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of TaylorTaylor, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of ZeelandZeeland, MI 3 of 5The Lodge at TaylorTaylor, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of GaylordGaylord, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of HollandHolland, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of LansingLansing, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of LeelanauSuttons Bay, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of MilfordMilford, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of OkemosOkemos, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of RichmondRichmond, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of Traverse CityTraverse City, MI

Showing 40 of 52; lowest-rated first.

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
FIFTEENINONE OPCO GROUP LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 06/24/2013
B&Y HEALTHCARE S CORPOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/24/2013
B&Y TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/24/2013
CODY HEALTHCARE S CORPOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/24/2013
CRAIG FLASHNER 2007 TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/24/2013
NORCROSS, ROBERTIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 06/24/2013
ROGERS, STACEYIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/20/2014
KIRK, KRISTINEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2020
FLASHNER, CRAIGIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/24/2013
PERLSTEIN, YITZCHOKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/24/2013
GENERATIONS HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/24/2013
PRESTIGE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/13/2013

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

7 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.

$12.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-6.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.4M
Related-party expense26% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 68%Medicare 6%Other / private 25%

This home reported $3.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 26% 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

$323per resident / day
operating cost
$9,817per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$305per 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 235421. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-21, 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