Munson Healthcare Crawford Continuing Care Center

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.

59.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 98 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 71.8% 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 39 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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 39 beds and averages 28.7 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.57 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.94 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.14 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 4.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.65 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.07 to 0.59 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 21% 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.

26 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-29 · 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

  This deficient practice pertains to Intake 2985836.Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent an elopement for one Resident (#1) of three residents reviewed for accident hazards and supervision.Findings include:Resident #1 (R1):Review of R1's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed initial admission to the facility on 8/1/25 with a diagnosis of dementia with behavioral disturbances. Review of R1's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/6/26, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2, indicative of severe cognitive impairment.Review of R1's quarterly Elopement Evaluation, dated 3/21/26, revealed a score of 6.0, indicating the resident was, at risk of elopement.Review of the Facility Reported Incident (FRI) included an investigation report submitted to the State Agency (SA) on 4/10/26 at 2:03 PM, which read, in part: On the evening of 4-09-2026, the Director of Nursing (DON) was exiting the facility for the day at 1624 [4:24 PM] and noted [R1] attempting to cross the front parking lot. [R1] has known wandering activities…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · E2026-03-25 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document collaboration among the interdisciplinary team (IDT) and to offer and provide inclusion of resident's or their representatives in the quarterly review of the comprehensive care plan for three Residents (#5, #7 and #13) of 12 residents reviewed and affecting all 19 residents receiving long-term care of a total of 27 residents residing in the facility.Findings include:Resident #5 (R5) During a telephone interview on 3/23/2026 at 12:10 PM, R5's Medical Durable Power of Attorney (MDPOA), Family Member (FM) D reported she was unable to visit R5 as often as she would like but she was able to visit a couple of time per year. When asked if she was able to attend R5's care conferences, FM D reported she was unaware of when R5's care conferences were held and had not been alerted or invited to review the plan of care with the IDT. When asked if she would like the opportunity to meet with the IDT for review of the plan of care, FM D stated, I like to…

  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 · D2026-03-25 · tag F0552 — isolated
  Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain informed consent for psychoactive medications for one Resident (R10) of five residents reviewed for psychoactive medications.Findings include:A review of R10's electronic medical records (EMR) indicated an admission into the facility on 2/21/2024 with a primary diagnosis of severe vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance (a cognitive decline caused by reduced blood flow to the brain, damaging brain tissue and affecting memory, thinking and behavior). A review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with a submission date of 3/16/26 revealed R10 had severely impaired cognition and Section C indicated resident is rarely/never understood. The medical record documented R10 had an appointed responsible party for health care and financial decision making.A review of R10's 'Physician Orders' for March 2026 indicated the antipsychotic medication quetiapine fumarate 25 mg (milligrams) was prescribed and initiated on 7/10/25 and the antidepressant medication sertraline HCl 25 mg was prescribed and initiated…

  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 · D2026-03-25 · 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

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide written notification of transfer or discharge and the facility bed hold policy for three Residents (#3, #6 and #32) of three residents reviewed for hospitalization. Findings include: Resident #3 (R3 During a room visit on 3/23/2026 at12:06 PM, R3 stated she had been out to hospital when she had experienced chest pain. A review of R3's medical record revealed the resident was sent to the Emergency Department on 2/7/26. The medical record included a facility Transfer Notice dated 2/7/26 with a reason for transfer, transfer location, and signature of the RN completing the form. The space designated for acknowledgement of receipt was unsigned and undated. The medical record also did not contain documentation that an explanation of the facility bed hold policy had been given to R3 or R3's responsible party. Resident #6 (R6) A review of R6's electronic medical record EMR) revealed the resident was transferred to the Emergency Department on 1/05/26 for evaluation of an acute episode of shortness of breath. Further review…

  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 · D2026-03-25 · 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 assess, monitor and maintain nutritional status of one Resident (R7) of two residents reviewed for nutritional needs.Findings include:Resident #7 (R7)A review of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R7 was admitted on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] included a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2 of 15 indicating severe cognitive impairment.On 3/23/2026 at 12:17 PM, R7 was observed at lunch feeding herself with success.During a telephone interview on 3/23/2026 at 2:23 PM, the Durable Power of Attorney said R7 was a very active person in youth and walked several miles a day but was not active now and was gaining weight and might outgrow her clothes.The facility Registered Dietitian (RD) B reviewed R7's nutritional status quarterly. The last progress note from RD B on 2/7/26 read, Note Text: Quarterly dietary review. Resident is receiving a…

  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 · D2026-03-25 · tag F0810 — isolated
  Provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide dining adaptive equipment for three Residents (R28, R30 and R36) of four residents reviewed for dining assistive devices. Findings include: On 3/23/2026 at 12:34 PM, lunch service was observed in the dining room.R28 was observed feeding himself. His hand was shaking and the food on his spoon was not all going into his mouth. Spills were present down the front of the clothing protector R28 was wearing. The meal tray card for R28 included instructions typed in capital letters and red ink indicating LARGER SPOON. The spoon R28 was using was not larger but was a standard teaspoon size. When the dining room staff were asked about the spoon, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) E said he should have received a larger spoon.R30 was observed in the dining room with his lunch. The meal tray card for R30 included instructions for a SMALL DIAMETER STRAW which was typed in capital letters and red ink. R30 did not have a straw . CNA G stated R30 did not geta smaller straw and it had been missed. CNA G said R3 needed…

  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 · Dcited before2025-08-20 · 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

  This deficient practice pertains to intake 2588223.Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent and readily detect an elopement for one Resident (#1) of three residents reviewed for accident hazards and supervision.Findings include:Resident #1 (R1):Review of R1's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed initial admission to the facility on 8/1/25 with a diagnosis of dementia with behavioral disturbances. Record review of R1's Nursing Clinical admission report, dated 8/1/25, revealed a level of cognitive impairment as, severe impairment (affecting all areas of judgement).Review of R1's Elopement Evaluation, dated 8/1/25, revealed a score of 6.0, indicating the resident was, at risk of elopement.Review of the FRI submitted to the State Agency (SA) on 8/7/25 at 5:15 PM, included an investigation report which read, in part: Resident [R1] was admitted to our department on 8/1/2025 at approximately 11:30 AM. Resident [R1] was noted by staff to be missing at 1600 [4:00 PM]. The resident was found at 1616 [4:16 PM]. Security camera footage was reviewed by security…

  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 · Ecited before2025-02-13 · 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

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement infection prevention and control measures to ensure a safe and sanitary environment for five Residents (#5, #10, #23, #15, and #13) of eight residents reviewed for infection prevention and control. Findings include: Resident #5 (R5 On 2/11/25 at 1:43 PM, R5 was observed with a urinary catheter drainage bag dragging on the floor beneath her wheelchair. There was no barrier beneath the drainage bag. R5's catheter drainage tubing was observed dragging on the floor beneath the wheelchair on 2/12/25 at 8:12 AM and 2/12/25 at 10:33 AM. Resident #10 (R10) On 2/11/25 at 1:13 PM, R10 was observed in a reclining geriatric care in the hallway. A plastic drinking cup with a straw was on the floor without a barrier beneath it next to R10's chair. At approximately 1:30 PM, Registered Nurse (RN) B picked up the cup from the floor and placed it on a mobile overbed table next to R10's chair. RN B did not sanitize the cup or obtain a clean cup of fluid for R10. Resident #23 (R23) R23 was diagnosed with Influenza A on…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-13 · tag F0551 — isolated
  Give the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights.
  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 one Resident (#185) of one resident reviewed for end-of-life care (EOLC) had a care plan and physician's order for terminal care, and appropriate activation of patient advocate/durable power of attorney prior to placing a resident on EOLC. Findings include: Resident #185 (R185) On 2/11/25 at approximately 10:45 AM, Resident R185 was observed in his room with his daughter present. R185's daughter said R185 was admitted to the facility on Thursday (2/6/25) and placed on EOLC on Sunday (2/9/25). R185's medical record was reviewed on 2/12/25 and revealed admission to the facility on 2/6/25 for skilled therapy services. Physician's orders dated 2/6/25 and 2/7/25 directed R185 receive occupational therapy and physical therapy five times per week. Nurses' progress notes dated 2/6/25 at 5:06 PM, 2/6/25 at 10:26 PM, 2/7/25 at 1:26 PM, and 2/7/25 at 9:58 PM documented R185 was alert and oriented times three (A/O X 3 - a normal level of consciousness and orientation). A progress note dated 2/9/25 at 9:30 AM documented, in…

  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 · D2025-02-13 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  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 assessments and documentation warranting the use of a physical restraint for one Resident (#10) of one resident reviewed for restraints, resulting in the potential for feelings of helplessness, agitation, decreased physical functioning and injury. Findings include: Resident #10 (R10) Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/26/2024, revealed R10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's dementia and Parkinson's Disease. Further review of the MDS assessment revealed R10 was unable to participate in the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and was assessed by staff to have severely impaired cognition. On 2/11/25 at 12:10 p.m., R10 was observed at the nurse's station seated in a reclining wheelchair with the leg rest engaged in the up position. R10 was awake and alert, attempting to get out of the chair and had both legs hanging off the right side of the leg rest. R10…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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

$27,600 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• $27,600 — penalty dated 2023-10-02
• Medicare payment denial — starting 2023-10-24 for 7 days

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 53 rows in the source record cover these 25 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

What families pay in MI