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

Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot

5669 Lakeshore Road, Fort Gratiot, MI 48059 · For profit - Corporation · 130 certified beds · (810) 385-7260 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (810) 385-7260 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)
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 harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (19% 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
  • about 19% 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) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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 increased11.8%10.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.9%5.4%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.6%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms31.0%4.3%6.5%check this — see note marked dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.0%3.0%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened18.2%12.0%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication22.4%19.4%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine90.8%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.0%5.1%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control18.9%20.0%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table6.6%14.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.7%1.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine79.6%79.5%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.4%24.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.6%11.7%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.311.841.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.771.641.80better

This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ 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.

48.7% 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 267 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

48.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
29.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.61U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.32hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.25hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 29.6% 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 135 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 0.61 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 89% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 SNF48.7%CMS range 42.4–54.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.7%CMS range 9.3–14.410.7%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 discharge29.6%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 discharge25.9%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 discharge23.7%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 identified91.4%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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF 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 worsened2.3%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 hospitalization9.8%CMS range 6.3–13.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.961.02Oct 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
1.06
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.74
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.70
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.47
RN hoursweekends
19.3%
Total nursing turnover
14.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 130 beds and averages 120.6 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 9 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 3.70 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 1.74 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 3.27 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.88 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.07 to 0.47 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 19% 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 (2025-07-02)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-06)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed properly store, label, and date medications for one resident (R56) of four residents reviewed for medication administration. Findings include: On 06/30/25 at 10:08 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN A) was observed to retrieve an inhaler for R56 from the cart which was unlabeled and undated. LPN A was asked if there was a date opened on the inhaler and replied, No. A review of R56's physician's order revealed, Ventolin HFA Inhalation Aerosol Solution 108 (90Base) Microgram per actuation (MCG/ACT)(Albuterol Sulfate) 2 puff inhale orally four times a day for shortness of breath. A review of R56 medical record revealed R56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's. A review of R56's most recent Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) revealed R56 with impaired cognition and required assistance of activities of daily living including medication administration. On 07/01/25 at 9:19 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was asked…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-02 · 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 Intakes MI00151561. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document notification of family and physician for a change in condition for one resident (R901) of three reviewed for notice of condition change. Findings include: A review of the complaint noted R901 had been seen on 01/28/25 and the resident appeared to be doing fine. It was noted that they were called on 01/30/25 and told R901 had been sent to the hospital. The complainant reported R901 appeared very ill and the emergency room physician reported that R901 had vomited and had a large amount of stool upon diagnostic examination and had sepsis (a body system wide infection). A review of the record for R901 revealed R 901 was admitted into the facility on [DATE], discharged to the hospital on [DATE] after and fall with fracture and re-admitted [DATE]. R901 was treated for a urinary tract infection and low blood pressure. Diagnoses included Dementia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Protein Calorie…

    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 · D2024-06-06 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to apply heel protector boots per physician orders for two residents (R5 and R24) out of two reviewed for skin conditions and apply positioning devices per physician orders for one resident (R1) out of two reviewed for positioning. Findings Include: R5 On 6/4/2024 at 9:15 AM, R5 was observed in their bed. Two heel protection boots were noted to be in a wheelchair. R5 was noted to have their heels resting on the mattress. R5 was asked if they wear heel boots while in bed. R5 said they sometimes do and sometimes don't. On 6/5/2024 at 9:16 AM, R5 was observed laying in bed. Two heel protection boots were noted to be in a wheelchair. R5 heels were noted to be resting on the mattress. A review of the medical record revealed that R5 admitted into the facility on 9/20/2022 with the following diagnoses, Difficulty in Walking and Restless Leg Syndrome. A review of the Minimum Data Set assessment revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 13/15 indicating an intact cognition. R5 also required assistance with…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to secure smoking/vape pens for one sampled resident (R59) of two reviewed for accidents. Findings include: On 6/04/24 at 10:52 AM, R59 was observed lying in bed, when asked a question R59 stated, I don't feel well and I don't want to talk. Observed on R59's overbed table was one vape/smoking pen. On 6/06/24 at 9:04 AM, R59 was observed lying in bed, when asked a question R59 stated, I don't want to talk. R59 then asked to be left alone. Observed on R59's overbed table was one vape/smoking pen. On 6/06/24 at 9:18 AM, the Unit Manager and R59's assigned nurse was asked if R59 was allowed to have vape/smoking pens in their room. The Unit Manager and the nurse was observed to go to R59's room and reported, residents are not to have smoking/vape pens. The Unit Manager was observed to come out of R59's room with three unopened boxes and one open smoking/vape pen. A review of R59's medical record revealed, R59 was admitted to the facility 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-06 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
    Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
    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 the call light was within reach of one resident (R1) out of one reviewed for call lights. Findings include: On 06/04/24 at 09:15 AM, R1 was observed in bed sleeping. The soft touch call light was hanging on the end of the bed out of reach of the resident. On 06/05/24 at 09:10 AM, R1 was observed in bed sleeping. The soft touch call light was on the floor past the end of the bed out of reach of the resident. A review of the medical record revealed that R1 admitted into the facility on 5/28/2014 with the following diagnoses, Weakness and Abnormal Posture. A review of the Minimum Data Set assessment revealed a Brief Interview for Mental status score of 8/15 impaired cognition. R1 also required assistance with bed mobility and transfers. Further record review of R1's care plan listed having the call light within reach as an intervention for multiple care plan problems as follows: Ensure/provide a safe environment. Call light in reach. Keep (R1's) environment as safe as possible with: even floors free from…

    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 · Dcited before2023-09-05 · 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 MI00139026. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement adequately supervision for one sampled resident (R901) of three residents reviewed for falls, resulting in multiple falls, and two hospital transfers. Findings include: A review of R901's census information revealed that R901 was originally admitted into the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's Disease, Heart Failure, Gout, and History of Falling. A review of the R901's 5-Day Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed that the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 8/15 indicating a moderately impaired cognition, and required extensive assistance of 2 persons for bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use. Further review of R901's admission fall risk assessment dated [DATE] categorized the resident as being at At Risk for falls with the following details noted: -Does the resident have a history of falls? Yes -Does the resident have a fear of falling,…

    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 · D2023-04-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based upon observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a care plan for use of a right hand orthosis (hand held splint) for one (R26) of two residents reviewed for orthotics resulting in limited resident access to and application of the orthosis. Findings include: Review of the facility record for R26 revealed an initial admission date of 2/8/23 with diagnoses that included Cerebral Infarction with Right Hemiplegia and indication of a history of falls. R26 was readmitted on [DATE] following a hospitalization with the new diagnosis of Encephalopathy. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated R26 required supervision for eating and upper body dressing, set up for oral hygiene and primarily maximum assistance for self care tasks and transfers otherwise. On 4/2/23 at approximately 9:50 AM, R26 was observed laying in bed. It was noted that R26 appeared to have right upper extremity contractures at the elbow, wrist and hand. There were no splints or orthotics in place 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-04-04 · 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 medications were administered per order for one resident (R38) of five reviewed for medications, resulting in the potential for the exacerbation of acute or chronic health conditions. Findings include: On 4/2/23 at 9:14 AM, R38 was observed sitting up in bed with their breakfast tray in front of them. R38 was unable to respond to interview questions and appeared to have some limited use of the left side of their body. A review of R38's record and Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed that the resident was admitted into the facility on 3/10/23 with medical diagnoses of Altered Mental Status, Unspecified Convulsions, End Stage Renal Disease, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis Following Cerebral Infarction Affecting Left Non-Dominant Side, Metabolic Encephalopathy, Dependence on Renal Dialysis, Other Seizures, Dysphagia, Oropharyngeal Phase, and Muscle Weakness. Further review revealed that 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-04-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to answer call lights in a timely manner, assist with brief changes and or failed to assist residents during meals for four residents (R1, R8, R62, R68) of seven residents reviewed for activities of daily living care (ADLs), resulting in dissatisfaction with care, dissatisfaction during meals, and the potential for compromised nutrition and weight loss. Findings include: Resident #1 (R1) On 4/2/23 at 9:00 AM, during an initial tour of the facility, R1 was interviewed about their level of satisfaction with the care that they were receiving at the facility. R1 indicated that they sometimes had to wait up to Two hours for a brief change. R1 stated, That's too long. On 4/2/23 at 10:00 AM, a review of R1's EMR revealed the following, R1 had diagnoses of Heart failure and Hemiplegia (Paralysis) affecting left non-dominate side. A review of R1's most recent quarterly MDS revealed that R1 had an intact cognition and required extensive assistance with…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-04 · 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 practices. This citation pertains to Intake MI00135496. Deficient practice #1. Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide sufficient staff monitoring to prevent inappropriate wandering, for one (R109) of one sampled residents reviewed for wandering, resulting and multiple unwelcome entries into residents' rooms. Findings include: On 4/02/23 at 11:13 AM, R109 was observed in bed sleeping, in the room a staff person was observed sitting in a chair near R109's bed. The staff person was asked the reason for her in R109's room and stated, Last night [R109] tried to get in bed with another resident without any clothes on. On 4/03/23 at 9:15 AM, R109 was observed with one to one (1:1) supervision from a staff person. On 4/04/23 at 12:35 PM, R109's one to one Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) R was asked about R109's behavior and stated, [R109] has been ok today. I was able to get [R109] to sit and watch a movie, but I didn't know [R109] was legally…

    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 · D2023-04-04 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    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 thickened liquids per diet order for one resident (R38) of three reviewed for nutrition, resulting in the potential for difficulty swallowing and aspiration. Findings include: On 4/2/23 at 9:14 AM, R38 was observed sitting up in bed with their breakfast tray in front of them. R38 was unable to respond to interview questions and appeared to have some limited use of the left side of their body. R38's tray included a glass of orange juice and a glass of milk, and their meal ticket indicated that the resident's liquids were supposed to be nectar thick consistency, and that the resident was under aspiration precautions. The orange juice and milk on the tray, along with two Styrofoam cups on the resident's bedside table (one with water, one with what appeared to be apple juice) were visibly regular consistency (thin liquid). R38 then picked up their glass of milk and took a drink. The milk, again observed to be regular consistency,…

    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 · D2023-04-04 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    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 a 14-day stop date was ordered for an as-needed (PRN) psychotropic medication and failed to document attempted non-pharmacological interventions prior to administration for one resident (R271) of five reviewed for unnecessary medications, resulting in the potential for adverse reactions and the prolonged use of psychotropic medication. Findings include: A review of 271's record and Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed that the resident was admitted into the facility on 3/24/23 with medical diagnoses of Displaced Bimalleolar Fracture Of Left Lower Leg, Subsequent Encounter For Closed Fracture With Delayed Healing, History Of Falling, Wedge Compression Fracture Of First Lumbar Vertebra, Subsequent Encounter For Fracture With Routine Healing, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, and Nicotine Dependence, Unspecified, With Unspecified Nicotine-Induced Disorders. Further review revealed that the resident is…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-04-04 · 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 store and maintain nebulizer masks in a sanitary manner, for two residents (R21 and R34), resulting in masks left hanging on the side of the bed, and the potential for contamination of equipment and transmission of bacteria leading to respiratory infections from contaminated equipment. Findings include: R21 On 4/02/23 at 11:22 PM, R21 was observed in bed. Observed on the side table was a nebulizer mask sitting on the top of the machine. The nebulizer mask was also observed in the above condition on 4/3/23 and 4/4/23. A review of R21's medical record noted, R21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE], with diagnosis Cardiorespiratory conditions. R34 On 4/02/23 at 8:57 AM, R34 was observed in bed. A nebulizer mask was observed to hang off the bed's assist bars. The nebulizer mask was also observed in the above condition on 4/3/23 and 4/4/23. A review of R34's medical record noted, R34 was admitted to the facility 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

“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 CIENA HEALTHCARE/LAUREL HEALTH CARE — 81 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 52.8+2.2 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 52.5+2.5 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.2+0.8 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.0≈ chain avg
The other 80 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aria Nursing and RehabilitationLansing, MI 1 of 5Autumnwood of McBainMcBain, MI 1 of 5Christian Park Health Care CenterEscanaba, MI 1 of 5Courtney ManorBad Axe, MI 1 of 5Ely ManorAllegan, MI 1 of 5Kith HavenFlint, MI 1 of 5Laurels Of Norworth TheWorthington, OH 1 of 5Laurels Of West Carrollton TheWest Carrollton, OH 1 of 5Laurels Of West Columbus, TheColumbus, OH 1 of 5Notting Hill of West BloomfieldWest Bloomfield, MI 1 of 5Regency at FremontFremont, MI 1 of 5Regency at JacksonJackson, MI 1 of 5Regency at TroyTroy, MI 1 of 5Regency at WaterfordWaterford, MI 1 of 5Regency at Whitmore LakeWhitmore Lake, MI 1 of 5Royalton Manor, LLCSt Joseph, MI 1 of 5The Laurels Of HeathHeath, OH 1 of 5The Laurels Of Walden ParkColumbus, OH 1 of 5The Laurels of GalesburgGalesburg, MI 1 of 5The Laurels of HudsonvilleHudsonville, MI 1 of 5The Manor of NoviNovi, MI 2 of 5Laurels Of Athens, TheAthens, OH 2 of 5Laurels Of Mt Vernon TheMount Vernon, OH 2 of 5Laurels Of Steubenville TheSteubenville, OH 2 of 5Regency At Bluffs ParkAnn Arbor, MI 2 of 5Regency at CheneDetroit, MI 2 of 5The Laurels Of GahannaColumbus, OH 2 of 5The Laurels Of KetteringKettering, OH 2 of 5The Laurels Of University ParkRichmond, VA 2 of 5The Laurels Of Willow CreekMidlothian, VA 2 of 5The Laurels of BedfordBattle Creek, MI 2 of 5The Laurels of ChathamPittsboro, NC 2 of 5The Laurels of ColdwaterColdwater, MI 2 of 5The Laurels of Forest GlennGarner, NC 2 of 5The Manor of Farmington HillsFarmington Hills, MI 2 of 5Willowbrook ManorFlint, MI 3 of 5Autumnwood of DeckervilleDeckerville, MI 3 of 5Boulevard Temple Care Center, LLCDetroit, MI 3 of 5Brittany ManorMidland, MI 3 of 5Hamilton Respiratory and Nursing CenterHamilton, OH

Showing 40 of 80; 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
MOHAMMAD QAZI 2022 CHILDREN'S TRUST UAD 5-4-2022Organization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST99%since 09/09/2022
KHAN, ANISIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/15/2006
QAZI, MOHAMMADIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/15/2006
CIENA HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
CANTO, CHERYLIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
MICHALAK, LISAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/28/2024
NAQVI, FARRUKHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
DEUTSCH, NEALIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/23/2025
GARDINA, ANNAIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/23/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$18.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.4M
Related-party expense19% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 0%Medicare 11%Other / private 89%

This home reported $3.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% 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.

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

$415per resident / day
operating cost
$12,619per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$425per 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 235621. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-02, 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