Valley Health Center
1015 E Paris Ave SE, Grand Rapids, MI 49546 · Non profit - Corporation · 20 certified beds · (616) 301-6209 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (23% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
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
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 23.1% | 10.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.4% | 5.4% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.9% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.7% | 4.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 10.4% | 3.0% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 17.6% | 12.0% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 8.6% | 19.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.7% | 5.1% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 34.1% | 20.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 15.1% | 14.8% | 17.1% | better |
§ 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.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 20 beds and averages 19.1 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 1 bed typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.18 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.05 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.62 is at or above 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 4.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.34 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.98 to 1.23 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
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · G2023-06-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 MI00137971 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent falls for 2 (Resident #13, Resident #11) of 3 residents reviewed for falls, resulting in a fall with major injury for Resident #13 and potential for additional falls with injury for Resident ##11. Findings include: Resident #13 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #13, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included repeated falls and alzheimers disease (disease that destroys memory and important mental functions). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #13, with a reference date of 4/29/23 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2/15 which indicated Resident #13 was severely cognitively impaired. In an observation on 6/26/23 at 10:38 AM, Resident #13 had a large bandage across her forehead and dark bruising under both of her eyes and on the bridge of her nose. An…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a care plan specific to the residents care needs in 1 (Resident #4) of 8 residents reviewed for care plans, resulting in the potential for unmet needs. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident # 4 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia and major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #4's Orders revealed that Resident #4 was enrolled to hospice services on 3/11/25. Review of Resident #4's current Care Plan did not reveal a focus related to hospice/end of life, or integration of hospice/end of life services into Resident #4's comprehensive plan of care. In an interview on 7/31/2025 at 8:42 AM, Director of Nursing (DON) B confirmed that Resident #4 was enrolled with hospice. DON B reviewed Resident #4's care plan with surveyor and confirmed that Resident #4's care plan did not have a focus related to hospice services that he was receiving. Review 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 perform effective hand washing and complete hand hygiene between glove changes during resident care in 2 of 2 residents (Resident #11 & #19) reviewed for infection control, resulting in the potential for cross-contamination and the development and spread of infection to a vulnerable population.Findings include:Resident #11 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #11 was a female, with pertinent diagnoses which included multiple sclerosis (a disease in which the immune system causes damage to the protective covering of the nerve cells), anemia, vascular disease, lower extremity ulcers, anxiety, and depression. In an observation on 7/29/25 at 10:06 AM, Agency Shabaz (a term used for Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA's) in the [NAME] House model of care who provide direct care to the residents) I assisted Resident #11 with a brief change in the resident's room. Observed Agency Shabaz I don (put on) gloves and clean Resident #11's…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan with person-centered interventions for paranoia in 1 resident (Resident #7) of 16 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans, resulting in the potential for inadequate mental health care. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #7 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: alzheimer's disease and dementia. Review of Resident #7's Care Plan revealed, .FOCUS: I have diagnoses of depression and anxiety. Date Initiated: 3/4/2019. Revision on: 3/4/2019. INTERVENTIONS: Administer medications as ordered .Date initiated 3/4/2019. Allow me to express thoughts, feelings, and concerns. Listen with non-judgmental acceptance. Revision on 4/6/2019. Encourage family and friends to visit regularly. Date initiated: 3/4/2019. I am followed by Behavioral Care Solutions for medication management .Date Initiated: 9/14/2023. Introduce me to peers and encourage…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 standard infection control practices for wound dressings in 1 resident (Resident #3) of 1 resident reviewed for wound care, resulting in the potential for delayed wound healing and infection. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #3 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #3, with a reference date of 7/12/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated Resident #3 was cognitively intact. During an observation on 08/06/24 at 10:39 AM in Resident #3's room, the resident's left hand was observed swollen, dark red, warm to touch, and with multiple Steri Strips (thin sticky bandages used to seal wounds by pulling the two side of the skin together without making any contact with the actual wound) covering a presumed wound. The steri strip's edges were peeled up, dry,…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2023-06-28 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) was on duty eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week resulting in the potential for negative clinical outcomes affecting all 16 residents at the facility. Findings include: Review of the current facility Nursing schedules indicated that on 6/26/23 there were no RN's scheduled to work. This did not meet the requirements for RN hours of 8 consecutive hours in a 24 hour period everyday. In an interview on 06/27/23 at 11:52 AM, NHA reported that the facility currently had a shortage of RN's and did not have an RN waiver. NHA reported that the facility had not been able to ensure 8 hours of RN coverage everyday since the DON was currently working remotely due to leave of absence. NHA reported that the DON has been working remotely since 5/16/23, and was unsure of the DON's return to work date. NHA reported that the DON is available by phone, but is not able to provide direct care. Review of Time clock detail indicated less than 8 hours consecutive hours of RN coverage on the following…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2023-06-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 safe and sanitary conditions in the kitchen and food storage areas in regard to labeling, dating, and discarding of expired food items, and general cleanliness, potentially affecting all those who receive meal services from the kitchen, resulting in the potential for cross-contamination of food and development of food-borne illness. Findings include: In an observation on 6/26/23 beginning at 9:19 a.m., reviewed the 100 building kitchen area. Observed the following items in the fridge: Cheese slices wrapped in Saran wrap with no label, open date, or use by date. A bottle of mustard with an open date of 4/17/23 and a use by date of 5/17/23. A 32 ounce bottle of French vanilla creamer with no open date or use by date. A 38 ounce bottle of ketchup with no open date or use by date. A 16 ounce bottle of ranch dressing with no open date or use by date. A 30 ounce container of mayonnaise with no open date or use by date. A 16 ounce bottle of Caesar dressing with no open date or use by date. A 15 ounce bottle…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-28 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 ensure residents received care in accordance with professional standards in 1 of 9 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care, resulting in the potential for delay in care for a hypotensive (low blood pressure) event and further decline in physical condition. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #1 was originally re-admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: hypotension. In an interview on 06/26/23 at 12:35 PM, Resident #1 reported that she did not feel well and was not able to walk on her own since she returned from the hospital. In an interview on 06/26/23 at 12:37 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) L reported that Resident #1 had returned from the hospital on 6/21/23 (5 days ago), after a 4 day stay for hypotension (low blood pressure). LPN L reported that she had not worked with Resident #1 since the resident had returned from the hospital. In an interview 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-28 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement 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 discontinue psychotropic as needed (PRN) medications after 14 days and/or document rationale for extended prn psychotropic medication use in 2 of 5 residents (Resident #13 and #165) reviewed for unnecessary medications, resulting in the potential for unnecessary medication use with a potential for adverse side effects and inability to monitor the effectiveness of the prescribed treatment due to lack of documented supporting evidence. Findings include: Resident #13 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #13, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included repeated falls and alzheimers disease (disease that destroys memory and important mental functions). Review of Resident #13's Orders revealed, LORazepam (Anti-anxiety medication) Oral Tablet 0.5 MG (Lorazepam) *Controlled Drug* Give 1 tablet by mouth as needed for anxiety May be administered two times a day. Order date: 1/21/2023. End date: Indefinite.…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-06-28 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — widespreadDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop policies and procedures to include current standards of practice in regard to pneumococcal immunizations, resulting in the potential for eligible residents to not be offered either the PCV15 (15-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine) or PCV20 (20-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine), therefore increasing the risk of acquiring, transmitting, or experiencing complications from pneumococcal pneumonia. Findings include: Review of the policy/procedure Resident Pneumococcal Vaccination, dated January 2021, revealed .It is our policy to offer our residents immunization against pneumococcal disease in accordance with current CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) guidelines and recommendations .Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. Each resident will be assessed for pneumococcal immunization upon admission. Self-report of immunization shall be accepted. Any additional efforts to obtain information shall be documented, including…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UNITED METHODIST RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 03/01/2019 |
| FETYKO, STEPHEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| FRITZ, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| IVES, HARLEM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| NIXON, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| BOETTCHER, IRIS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/13/2013 |
| CARLSON, KALEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| MAAG, NICOLE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| VAN BEMDEN, CHERYL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/30/2014 |
| WATKINS, TRISHA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/19/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $461K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% 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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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
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.
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 235649. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-31, 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.