Optalis Health & Rehabilitation at Leonard

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

Met the expected recovery: 73.3% 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 30 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 47% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 69 beds and averages 60.0 residents a day — about 87% 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 3.39 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.99 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 3.13 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.66 to 0.24 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 62% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

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.

27 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 17 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2026-04-09 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
  Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure menus were consistently followed for 5 (Residents #26, 50, 55, 3, and 63) of 15 residents reviewed for dining and 9 of 11 residents from a confidential resident council meeting with the potential to affect all residents who consume food/beverages from the facility's kitchen resulting in dissatisfaction with meals, being provided incorrect foods, and/or being provided incorrect serving sizes with the potential for decreased oral intake and weight loss.Findings include:Resident #26: Review of Resident #26's diet order, dated 12/7/25, stated, Diabetic (condition that affects blood sugar levels) / Consistent Carb (carbohydrate) / Controlled Carb diet . (A consistent carbohydrate diet meal plan is one that aims to provide a consistent amount of carbohydrates at each meal.) Review of Resident #26's brief interview for mental status, dated 2/18/26, was scored 15 which reflected she was cognitively intact.During an interview on 04/07/2026…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-04-09 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure food preferences were consistently honored for 4 (Residents #26, 1, 24, and 50) of 15 residents reviewed for dining and 11 of 11 residents from a confidential resident council meeting resulting in dissatisfaction with meals and the potential for decreased oral intake and weight loss. Findings include:Resident #26:Review of Resident #26's brief interview for mental status, dated 2/18/26, was scored 15 which reflected she was cognitively intact.During an interview on 04/07/2026 at 9:23 AM, Resident #26 was in her room and reported her meal tickets (a meal ticket indicated the residents' diet order, food preferences and other information to guide meal service) weren't followed consistently.During an observation and interview on 04/08/2026 at 8:11 AM, Resident #26 was served breakfast in her room. Resident #26's meal ticket on the tray indicated under .MEAL PREFERENCES. to provide 6 ounces of coffee and 8 ounces of sugar free punch.…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain best practices in the food service area resulting in the potential to spread food borne illness to all residents that consume food from the kitchen.Findings include: On 4/7/2026 at 9:15 AM, an initial tour of the kitchen was conducted with Dietary Manager (DM) O. An interview with DM OO found that he has been in the position for a couple of months.On 4/7/26 at 9:37 AM, observation of the can opener on the preparation table found that the blade was covered in dried red debris. When asked if the can opener had been used today, DM OO asked staff working the in the kitchen, and stated no. On 4/7/26 at 9:43 AM, observation of the underside of the juice machine found accumulations of debris where the spouts are mounted to the unit. DM OO agreed he could see the accumulation on the underside of the machine and stated it should get cleaned daily. On 4/7/26 at 9:55 AM, observation of the clean utensils found one mechanical scoop with dried on food debris in the ladle portion of the scoop.On 4/7/26 at 10:00…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure: 1.) facility staff's use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for enhanced barrier and transmission based precautions, 2.) cleaning of shared resident equipment, and 3.) cleaning of respiratory equipment for 5 (Residents #17, #30, #50, #39 and #5 ) of 24 resident reviewed for infection control practices, resulting in the potential for the introduction of infection, cross-contamination, and disease transmission.Findings include:Enhanced Barrier Precautions Resident #39 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #39 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included muscle weakness and chronic pain syndrome. Review of Resident #39's Care Plan revealed, (Resident #39) requires enhanced barrier precautions related to: Indwelling medical device. Date Initiated: 03/27/2026. Interventions: Staff will wear a gown and gloves during high contact resident activities. Date Initiated: 03/27/2026.…

  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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services to promote dignity and respect in 1(Resident #39) of 24 residents reviewed for reviewed for dignity and respect ; and 6 of 11 residents from the confidential group meeting resulting in unmet care needs and the potential for feelings of diminished self-worth, sadness, and frustration. Findings include:Resident #39 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #39 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included muscle weakness and chronic pain syndrome (a persistent, long-term pain condition lasting 3–6 months or more, often continuing after an initial injury has healed). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #39, with a reference date of 3/10/26 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15 which indicated Resident #39 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #39's Care Plan revealed, Focus: (Resident #39) has ADL self-care…

  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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
  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 honor resident preferences for customary routines and activities for 1 (Resident #39) of 24 reviewed for self-determination resulting in feelings of frustration and the potential for diminished quality of life.Findings include:Resident #39Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #39 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included muscle weakness and chronic pain syndrome. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #39, with a reference date of 3/10/26 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15 which indicated Resident #39 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #39's Care Plan revealed, Focus: (Resident #39) has ADL self-care deficit related to (r/t) impaired mobility . Date initiated: 1/11/26. Interventions: ADL (Activities of Daily Living) assist of 2 staff. Date initiated: 3/27/26 . Focus: (Resident #39) needs assistance for meeting emotional,…

  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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  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 resident rooms were kept clean and in good repair for 3 (Resident #21, #22 and #30) of 24 Residents reviewed for home-like environment, resulting in emotional distress and a potential for increased risk of infection and/or injury.Findings include: Resident #21 Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #21 with a reference date of 3/1/26, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment score of 15/15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Section GG revealed Resident #21 was independent with self-propelling her wheelchair up to 50 feet. During an observation on 4/8/26 at 12:31pm, the walls in Resident #21 were noted to be in disrepair. Approximately 6 dime sized holes were noted in the walls of Resident #21's room, along with multiple areas of deep gouges and scraped off paint, including an area above the head of bed that contained sections 2x4 (inches) gouges in which the paint was…

  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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0628 — isolated
  Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
  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 proper discharge notifications were completed in 1(Resident #39) of 2 residents reviewed for discharge process, resulting in Resident #39 not receiving written notice of bed hold when she was discharged from the facility to the hospital. Findings include:Resident #39Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #39 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included muscle weakness and chronic pain syndrome. Review of Resident #39's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed that Resident was transferred to the hospital on 1/16/26. This writer was unable to locate documentation of written notice of bed hold for Resident #39's transfer on 1/16/26. This writer requested documentation of written notice of bed hold for Resident #39's transfer on 1/16/26 via email to Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A on 4/8/26 at 4:20 PM. During an interview on 4/8/2026 at 4:27 PM, NHA A and Director of Nursing (DON) B reported…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-09 · 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 follow professional standards of practice for medication administration that included administration and monitoring of a narcotic medication by a licensed professional in 1 (Resident #20) of 5 residents reviewed for medication administration, resulting in the potential for narcotic diversion, unrelieved pain, and the worsening of medical conditions. Findings include: Resident #20Review of an admission Record revealed Resident # 20 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included unspecified dementia (diagnosis used when cognitive decline, memory loss, and functional impairment are present, but the specific type (e.g., Alzheimer's, vascular) cannot be determined. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #20, with a reference date of 2/18/26 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 00/15 which indicated Resident #20 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of…

  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 · Dcited before2026-04-09 · 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 provide appropriate Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care (provide showers and/or washing hair) for 2 (Residents #39 and Resident #21) of 4 residents reviewed for ADL care, resulting in the potential for avoidable negative physical and psychosocial outcomes for resident's who are dependent on staff for assistance. Findings include: Resident #39 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #39 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included muscle weakness and chronic pain syndrome. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #39, with a reference date of 3/10/26 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15 which indicated Resident #39 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #39's Care Plan revealed, Focus: (Resident #39) has ADL self-care deficit related to (r/t) impaired mobility . Date initiated: 1/11/26. Interventions: ADL (Activities of Daily Living)…

  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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to OPTALIS HEALTH & REHABILITATION — 36 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

5 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.

About 73% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $641K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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