Clearstream Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
240 E North St, Hastings, MI 49058 · For profit - Individual · 98 certified beds · (269) 945-9564 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent May 2026
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (47) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $35,416 in federal fines (most recent 2024-09-18)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 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 fell from 2 to 1 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 | 7.6% | 10.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.6% | 5.4% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.3% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.7% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.3% | 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 | 2.0% | 3.0% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.0% | 12.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.7% | 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 | 2.7% | 5.1% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.4% | 20.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 27.5% | 14.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.1% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.9% | 79.5% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 15.8% | 24.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 18.3% | 11.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.68 | 1.84 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.45 | 1.64 | 1.80 | worse |
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
37.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 50 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 55.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 36 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 22% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 35% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 37.7%CMS range 25.3–52.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.9%CMS range 8.9–17.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 55.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 50.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 52.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 91.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 95.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 1.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.0%CMS range 3.4–12.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.37 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 98 beds and averages 88.1 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 10 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.50 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.10 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 2.96 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.51 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
47 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 33 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-09-18 · 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 intakes: MI00146150, MI00146185, MI00146924 This citation has 2 deficient practice statements. DPS #1: Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the safety and prevent elopement for 3 (Resident#100, Resident #101, Resident #105) of 5 residents reviewed for elopement, resulting in an Immediate Jeopardy when Resident #100 and Resident #101 left the premises alone, unbeknownst to staff, for an extended period, and were later found in the community and the likelihood for serious harm and/or injury for Resident #105. Findings include: Review of the facility Elopment Policy dated [DATE] and revised [DATE] revealed, Policy: It is the policy of this facility that all residents are afforded adequate supervision to provide the safest environment possible. All residents will be assessed for behaviors or conditions that put them at risk for wandering/elopement. All residents so identified will have these issues addressed in their individual plan of 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-09-18 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intakes MI00146152, MI00146926 Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents right to be free from resident to resident abuse for 4 (Resident #102, Resident #103, Resident #107 and Resident #108) of 5 residents reviewed for abuse, resulting in Resident #102 physically assaulting Resident #103, and Resident #107 grabbing Resident #108 in a sexual manner. Findings include: Resident #102 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #102 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: unspecified dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interfere with daily functioning). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #102, with a reference date of 6/11/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3/15 which indicated Resident #102 was severely cognitively impaired. Section E revealed Resident #102 exhibited physical behavioral symptoms directed toward others…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-06-25 · 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
This citation pertains to intake #MI00143822. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to use a sit-to-stand lift (a medical device used to assist individuals in transitioning from a seated to a standing position), as recommended by therapy and per care plan, during a transfer from the resident's bed to wheelchair in 1 (Resident #100) of 3 residents reviewed for safety, resulting in the resident sustaining a laceration requiring sutures. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #100 was a female, originally admitted to the facility 3/6/24, with pertinent diagnoses which included: muscle weakness (generalized), and cognitive communication deficit. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #100, with a reference date of 3/11/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated Resident #100 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of a General Progress Note dated 3/11/24 at 7:38 PM revealed, Note Text: CNA (certified nurse aide) reported to writer that pt…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-03-26 · 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 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement facility fall protocols and utilize gait-transfer belts/implement interventions before and after falls and provide adequate supervision for 2 residents (Resident #65 & #64) of 3 reviewed for falls/supervision resulting in a fall with a fracture needing surgical repair for Resident #65 and the potential for accidents and injuries to residents at risk for falls. Findings include: Resident #65 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #65, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: muscle weakness. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #65, with a reference date of 2/16/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14/15 which indicated Resident #65 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #65's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed: Section GG - Functional Abilities and Goals - Coding: Safety and Quality of Performance - If helper…
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 · F2026-05-05 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespreadEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 food at a palatable temperature for 1 of 1 resident (R33), resulting in the potential for decreased food consumption for all residents who receive food from the kitchen and nutritional decline.Findings Include: Resident #33 During an interview on 5/3/2026 at 10:08 AM, Resident #33 reported ongoing concerns with cold food. Resident #33 reported she felt that the food was a bit warmer when served in the dining room, but when she ate meals in her room, the food was always cold. Resident #33 reported she had spoken with multiple facility staff members on numerous occasions about her concerns with food, but they were still serving cold food often. In a follow up interview on 5/4/2026 at 1:11 PM, Resident #33 was sitting in her chair in the dining room. Resident #33 reported she had just eaten her lunch, which was served cold, even though she had received her meal in the dining room. Resident #33 voiced frustration about being served cold food frequently. In a follow up interview on 5/5/2026 at 12:37 PM,…
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 · Fcited before2026-05-05 · 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 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 5/4/26 at starting at 8:05 AM, a follow-up tour of the kitchen with Dietary Director (DD) W occurred.On 5/4/26 at 8:26 AM, observation of the shelf above the hand sink found a spray bottle with a yellow solution that didn't have a common name for labeling.According to the 2022 FDA Food Code section 7-102.11 Common Name. Working containers used for storing POISONOUS OR TOXIC MATERIALS such as cleaners and SANITIZERS taken from bulk supplies shall be clearly and individually identified with the common name of the material.On 5/4/26 at 8:28 AM, observation of the three-door cooler labeled #1, found a cooked ham and a bag of cooked brats sitting on two log packages of raw ground beef in the bottom right of the cooler. When asked about proper storage in the cooler, DD W stated the ready to eat food, like the cooked ham and brats, should not…
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 before2026-05-05 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure updated and accurate advanced directive information was in place for 2 (Resident #10 and Resident #5) of 18 residents reviewed for advanced directives (legal documents that allow a person to identify decisions about end-of-life care ahead of time), resulting in the potential for a resident's preferences for medical care to not be followed by the facility, or other healthcare providers. Findings include:Resident #10 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #10 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: vascular dementia (a decline in thinking skills caused by conditions that block or reduce blood flow to the brain) and major depressive disorder (condition characterized by persistent low mood, loss of interests in activities and low energy lasting at least 2 weeks). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident 10 with a reference date of [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from sexual abuse by a resident for 1 (Resident #67) of 4 residents reviewed for abuse resulting in Resident #67 being inappropriately touched by Resident #43. Findings include: Resident #67Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #67 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included major depressive disorder and anxiety disorder. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #67, with a reference date of 2/16/26 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13/15 which indicated Resident # 67 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #67's Progress Note dated 12/10/25 revealed, Writer was walking to the top of the hall near the nurse's station and overheard (Resident #67) yelling loudly that (Resident #43) had grabbed her butt. They were both separated .Review of Resident #67's Progress Note dated 12/11/25 and documented by SW H…
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 · D2026-05-05 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide 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 that written bed hold notice was provided to 1 (Resident #95) of 3 residents reviewed for transfer and discharge from the facility.Findings include:Resident #95 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #95 was a female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had pertinent diagnoses which included: malignant neoplasm (cancer that has spread to other parts of the body), weakness, and hypertension (high blood pressure). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #95, with a reference date of 2/9/26 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10/15 which indicated Resident #95 was mildly cognitively impaired.Review of Progress Note for Resident #95 dated 2/11/26 at 14:35 (2:35 PM) revealed .they recommended transfer to ED (emergency department) for eval (evaluation).Resident notified.(Name Omitted) provider notified and ordered to transfer.Review of Progress Note for Resident #95 dated 2/11/26…
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 before2026-05-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 review and revise a comprehensive, individualized plan of care after a resident-to-resident abuse incident for 1 (Resident #43) of 18 residents reviewed for care plans, resulting in the potential for unmet care needs and impaired physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings include:Resident #43 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #43 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included bipolar disorder (mental health condition that causes severe mood swings) and other sexual disorder (used to classify other sexual disorders that involve atypical patterns of sexual behavior or development not covered by more specific categories.)Review of the facility's Facility Reported Investigation (FRI) dated 12/15/25 revealed, Incident Summary: Resident #67 was standing in the common area, speaking to Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) O. Resident #43 was propelling in his wheelchair behind Resident #67…
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 before2026-05-05 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to implement pressure ulcer prevention interventions, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #42) of 1 resident reviewed for pressure ulcer prevention, resulting in the potential for the development of an avoidable pressure ulcer.Findings include:Resident #42Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #42 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: unspecified dementia (a syndrome characterized by a progressive, irreversible decline in memory, thinking, behavior, and the ability to perform daily tasks), and moderate protein-calorie malnutrition (deficiency of proteins, calories and micronutrients absorption causing loss of muscle and body fat). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #42 with a reference date of 2/11/26, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment score of 0/15, which indicated the resident was severely…
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 before2026-05-05 · 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 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement care plan interventions for fall prevention for 1 (Resident #58) of 3 residents reviewed for accidents, resulting in the potential for falls and injury. Findings include:Resident #58Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #58 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: alzheimer's disease (progressive, irreversible brain disorder that slowly destroys memory, thinking skills, and eventually the ability to carry out daily tasks), lack of coordination and muscle wasting (reduction in muscle mass, strength and function). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #58 with a reference date of 4/23/26, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment score of 1/15, which indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Section J revealed Resident #58 had a fall with injury since the previous assessment.Review of a Care Plan for Resident #58…
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 · D2026-05-05 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
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 develop and implement person-centered dementia care interventions based on lifelong habits and personality for 2 (Resident #63 and Resident #18) of 7 residents reviewed for dementia care, resulting in Resident #63 experiencing agitation and avoidable stress and Resident #18 breeching other residents' personal space, being yelled at and at risk for aggressive responses from others.Findings include: Review of The Unmet Needs Model, [NAME]-[NAME] and [NAME] (1995), revealed that those with dementia develop problem behaviors from an imbalance in the interaction between life-long habits and personality, current physical and mental states and less than optimal environmental conditions.Review of Revenge of the Introvert, Psychology Today 2010, revealed .Rather than being averse to social engagement, introverts become overwhelmed by too much of it. they.seem to process more information than others in any given situation. To digest it, they do best…
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 before2026-05-05 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 maintain accurate and complete medical records for 1 of 18 residents (Resident #5) reviewed for complete and accurate medical record documentation, resulting in the potential for staff and providers mismanaging care for residents. Findings include:Resident #5 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #5 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included depression and visual hallucinations. Review of Resident #5's Letters of Conservatorship dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #5 was appointed a conservator (A person or organization appointed by a court to manage the personal care, financial affairs, or both, of an adult who cannot handle these responsibilities independently.) The letter of conservatorship expiration date was [DATE] . Notice concerning letters of conservatorship. All new and reissued letters of conservatorship will expire annually, 8 weeks beyond after the anniversary date of the appointment…
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.
Show the remaining 33 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake #2674240Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from resident-to-resident physical abuse for 2 (Resident #103 and Resident #104) of 4 residents reviewed for abuse resulting in Resident #104 grabbing Resident #103 by the arm, and Resident #103 slapping Resident #104 in the face.Findings include:Resident #103Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #103 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: alzheimer's disease (a progressive, irreversible brain disorder that slowly destroys memory and thinking skills) and generalized anxiety disorder (mental health condition characterized by persistent feelings of worry and restlessness).Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #103 with a reference date of 11/29/25, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment score of 0/15, which indicated the resident was severely cognitively…
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 · E2025-04-02 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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 R61 According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], R61 was cognitively intact as evidenced by her BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) score of 14/15. During an observation and interview on 3/31/25 at 12:15 PM, R61 was awake in bed with her head-of-bed (HOB) at the window. The windowsill track was littered with dead bugs, dust, and debris. The tile sill was cracked and chipped with a large chunk of it missing. The veneer around the bed head board was pulled away from the wood leaving an area large enough to put a hand through. R61 stated, I keep my house neat, tidy, and clean. I would never have my house like this. I have a handyman that helps me at home to keep things fixed. I'm glad I'm going home tomorrow. During an observation and interview on 4/1/25 at 8:00 AM, the window curtain at R61's HOB had a stain the size of a saucer cup at eye level of the resident. R61 stated, I'll be glad when I go home today. I would have stains like this cleaned up. Based on observation, interview, and record review 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 · Ecited before2025-04-02 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 maintain professional standards of nursing practice and notify the provider of missed medication doses, 2 of 19 residents (Resident #6 and Resident #338) reviewed for professional standards, resulting in missed medications and treatments, and the potential for the worsening of a condition and a delay in treatment. Findings include:Resident #6 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #6 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation (irregular rapid heart rate that commonly causes poor blood flow). Review of Resident #6's Medication Administration Orders (MAR) revealed, Symbicort Inhalation Aerosol 160-4.5 MCG/ACT (Budesonide-Formoterol Fumarate Dihydrate) (combination inhaler used to treat asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) 2 puff inhale orally every morning and at bedtime . During a medication administration observation on 4/1/25 at 8:19 AM, Licensed…
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 · Ecited before2025-04-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure facial hair grooming was offered and/or provided and/or clean hair was maintained for 4 (Residents #12, 14, 17, 53) of 6 residents reviewed that were dependent on staff for activities of daily living resulting in unwanted facial hair, debris in hair, appearing unkempt, and the potential for feeling embarrassed or having decreased self-worth. Findings include: Resident #12 Review of Resident #12's most recent brief interview for mental status score, dated 2/19/2025, was scored 5 which indicated Resident #12 had severe cognitive impairment. During an observation and interview on 03/31/25 at 10:57 AM, Resident #12 was seated in her wheelchair in the dining/activity room of the locked memory care unit of the facility, appeared confused, and was unable to answer questions asked by the surveyor. Resident #12 had long white facial hairs over the surface of her chin. The hairs' lengths varied, but many were approximately half an inch in length. During an observation on 03/31/25 at 03:49 PM, Resident #12 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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-02 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — patternEnsure 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to consistently provide residents with their food and beverage preferences for 12 residents (Residents #17, 53, 65, 2, 64, 85, 12, 14, 76, 22, 24, and 338) out of a facility census of 88 resulting in incorrect items provided, decreased satisfaction, and the potential for frustration, weight loss, and/or dehydration. Findings include: During an observation on 04/01/25 at 08:55 AM, Resident #17's breakfast tray was delivered to the dining room of the locked memory care unit and the meal ticket stated, Beverages Apple Juice, Chocolate Boost (nutritional supplement drink), . She was provided a red beverage (not apple juice) and was given a Vanilla Ensure Plus nutritional supplement drink (this is not a comparative product as it contains 110 calories more than an original Boost drink). Additionally, the alternate product provided was vanilla, when her meal ticket preference indicated the Chocolate flavor should be provided. During an interview on 04/01/25 at 08:59 AM, Registered Nurse FF reported if Resident #17…
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 · D2025-04-02 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were cared for with dignity and respect for 1 (Resident #54) of 2 residents reviewed for dignity, resulting in the potential for feelings of embarrassment, frustration, depression, and loss of self-worth and an overall deterioration of psychological well-being. Findings include: Resident #54 Review of an Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed Resident #54 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included diabetes. Review of an MDS assessment for Resident #54, with a reference date of 2/25/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15 which indicated Resident #54 was cognitively intact. During an interview on 3/31/25 at 1:48 PM, Resident #54 reported that she was frustrated with how some of the staff interacted with and talked about residents. Resident #54 reported that a few days ago, she had overheard Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) P and Q in the hallway making…
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 before2025-04-02 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an updated and accurate advanced directive information was in place for 1 of 19 residents (Resident #338) reviewed for advanced directives (legal documents that allow a person to identify decisions about end-of-life care ahead of time), resulting in the potential for a resident's preferences for medical care to not be followed by the facility, or other healthcare providers. Findings include: Resident #338 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #338 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included hypertension (high blood pressure). Review of Resident #338's Designation of Patient Advocate Form dated 7/23/24 revealed Resident #338 had designated Family Member (FM) RR as her patient advocate to act in accordance with her end of life decisions .2. Specific Instructions Regarding Life-Sustaining Treatment: I understand I do not have to choose one of the instructions regarding life sustaining…
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 before2025-04-02 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to notify the responsible party of a change in resident condition in 1 of 2 residents (R7) reviewed for notification of changes, resulting in the guardian/emergency contact not being made aware of an injury of unknown origin (R7) causing the inability to participate in timely medical decision-making. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], R7 was moderately cognitively impaired as evidenced by her BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) score of 10/15. Her diagnoses included dementia and Alzheimer's disease with no mention of intermittent urinary catheterization. Review of R7's Progress Note dated 3/15/2025 at 00:30 (AM) revealed, . When doing straight cath at this time noted that her labia (inner and outer folds of vulva at either side of vagina) was bruised bilaterally (both sides) and swollen. Had 1/4-inch laceration above urethra (duct that drains urine from body) . During an interview on 4/2/25 at 12:27 PM, Registered…
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 · D2025-04-02 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 MI00150533 Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to prevent the misappropriation of resident narcotic medications in 1 of 1 residents (Resident #64) reviewed for misappropriation of property, resulting in loss of resident's pain medication, and the potential for uncontrolled pain and discomfort. Findings include: Resident #64 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #64 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included muscle weakness. Review of the facility's Drug Diversion Investigation revealed, On Thursday January 23rd at approximately 4:30 PM (Director of Nursing B) received a phone call from (Facility pharmacy) regarding a narcotic discrepancy regarding (Resident #64) Percocet (narcotic) script (prescription) . The pharmacy stated that they had a discrepancy for 20 unaccounted for Percocet . (DON B) was also unable to locate the shift narcotic count sheet for same said script. There was no line item on 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 · D2025-04-02 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 operationalize its abuse policy and procedure for 1 resident (R7) of 2 residents reviewed for potential sexual abuse, resulting in staff not reporting observations of abuse to the Nursing Home Administrator immediately, potential for further resident to resident observations of abuse to go unreported and uninvestigated. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], R7 was moderately cognitively impaired as evidenced by her BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) score of 10/15. Her diagnoses included dementia and Alzheimer's disease with no mention of intermittent urinary catheterization. Review of R7's Progress Note dated 3/15/2025 at 00:30 (AM) revealed, . When doing straight cathed (using a device to drain urine from bladder) at this time noted that her labia (inner and outer folds of vulva at either side of vagina) was bruised bilaterally (both sides) and swollen. Had 1/4-inch laceration above urethra (duct that drains urine…
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 before2025-04-02 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to update and revise the person centered care plan in a timely manner with appropriate interventions for the prevention of falls for 1 resident (#43) from a total sample of 19 residents, with the potential for physical, mental, and psychosocial unmet care needs and harm. Findings include: .One of the biggest safety challenges is preventing falls .3 of every 4 nursing center residents fall each year .Nursing staff must have the knowledge and skills to prevent injury from falls .Previous falls, diminished strength, gait and balance impairments, medications, Alzheimer's disease or dementia, vision impairment and environmental risk factors .Staffing and organization of care. Inadequate staffing may leave residents who are likely to fall without proper supervision . https://www.ahrq.gov/patient-safety/settings/long-term-care/resource/facilities/ltc/mod3sess3.html Resident #43: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #43 was a male with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-02 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary care and services to prevent, treat, and promote healing of pressure ulcers in 1 of 1 residents (Resident #288) reviewed pressure ulcers, resulting in the potential for delayed healing of pressure ulcers, infection and the development of new ulcers. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #288 was a female with pertinent diagnoses which included pressure ulcer of right buttock stage 3, pressure ulcer of left ankle unstageable, pressure ulcer of left heel stage 3, chronic venous hypertension with ulcer of bilateral lower extremity (sustained high blood pressure in leg veins leading to open sores or wounds that are slow to heal), and pressure ulcer of other site stage 3. Review of Care Plan for Resident #288 with an initiation date of 3/25/25, revealed the focus, .The resident has cellulitis of the (SPECIFY) r/t (related to) Fragile skin .RLE lymphatic generalized vascular ulcer admission…
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 before2025-04-02 · 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 Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure safety precautions and use of assistive devices for 1 (Resident #33) of 4 residents which have the potential to negatively affect the residents highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: Resident #33: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #33 was a male with pertinent diagnoses which included acquired absence of right leg above the knee, multiple sclerosis (immune system eats away at the protective covering of the nerve fibers and interrupts communication between the brain and the rest of the body), blindness left eye, and muscle wasting and atrophy (loss of muscle mass and strength). Review of Care Plan for Resident #33 revealed the focus, .(Resident #33) is at risk for falls r/t (related to) blind in left eye/low vision, medication use . with intervention .Transfer: Resident is able to use slide board . Review of General Progress Notes dated 6/7/2024 at 7:51 PM, revealed, .Writer…
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 · D2025-04-02 · tag F0713 — isolatedProvide or arrange emergency care by a doctor 24 hours a day.
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 emergency physician services were utilized by facility staff for one resident (R7) of 19 reviewed for emergency physician care needs, resulting in not receiving prompt physician emergency services and the increased potential for complications to a serious health condition. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], R7 was moderately cognitively impaired as evidenced by her BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) score of 10/15. Her diagnoses included morbid obesity, anxiety disorder, metabolic encephalopathy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and chronic respiratory failure. Review of R7's Progress Note dated 3/19/25 at 14:45 (2:45 PM) indicated R7 had returned from the hospital at this time. Review of R7's Progress Note dated 3/20/2025 at 4:13 (AM) revealed, Patient still has yet to void since returning from the hospital the evening of 3/19. This writer called patients provider (Physician KK) afterhours…
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 · D2025-04-02 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than five percent in 2 of 11 residents (Resident #338 and #6) reviewed for medication administration, resulting in a medication error rate 12% and the potential for adverse effects. Findings include: Resident #338 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #338 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included hypertension (high blood pressure). Review of Resident #338's MAR revealed, Coreg Oral Tablet 3.125 MG (Carvedilol) (blood pressure medication). Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for HTN (hypertension) hold dose if SBP (systolic blood pressure) less than 90 or HR (heart rate) less than 50. Review of Resident #338's MAR revealed, Depakote (antipsychotic medication) ER Oral Tablet Extended Release 24 Hour (Divalproex Sodium) Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to bipolar disorder Review of Resident #338's MAR revealed, Depakote ER…
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 · D2025-04-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly label, date, and store medications in 1 out of 1 medication carts resulting in the potential for decreased efficacy of medications and the exacerbation of medical conditions. Findings include: During an observation of the B hall medication cart with Registered Nurse (RN) FF on 4/1/25 at 12:48 PM, one opened insulin lispro (Humalog) pen was noted in the top shelf of the cart. The pen was labeled with the resident's name, but the date the medication was opened was missing. RN FF confirmed that nurses were suppose to label the insulin pens when they open them, and this was missed. In the stock meds (medications used for multiple residents) area of the cart there was one opened bottle of Mucus ER (Medication to help thin mucus) which did not have an open date, and one opened bottle of Cetirizine 10 mg (Allergy medication) that also did not include an opened date. RN FF reported that nurses were suppose to label the medications when they were opened, and this was missed. During an interview on 4/2/25 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-02 · 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 effectively implement infection control measures that included: 1.) effective implementation of Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for 2 residents (R7 and R338) 19 residents reviewed for infection control, resulting in the potential for cross contamination of infection to a vulnerable population. Findings include: R7 According to R7's medical records, an Order Summary dated 3/23/25, indicated R7 Maintain foley catheter with 18 Fr 10 cc balloon (size) for urinary retention (diagnosis). Further review of R7's Order Summary on 3/31/25, did not indicate the resident was placed on EBP. Review of R7's Care Plan did not indicate a resident-specific treatment plan for Enhanced Barrier Precautions. Review of R7's Progress Note dated 3/22/2025 at 22:45 (10:45 PM) revealed, .Foley catheter 16FR (french) 10cc balloon inserted. Observed on 3/31/25 at 11:52 AM, R7 lying in bed with a urinary catheter bag attached to her bed. During 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 · D2024-09-18 · 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 This citation pertains to intake # MI00146924. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper post-fall care and assessment for 1 (Resident #106) of 3 residents reviewed for falls, resulting in the potential for serious injury. Findings include: Review of the facility's Fall-Care and Treatment policy with a reference date of 7/11/18 revealed Policy: It is the policy of this facility to evaluate extent of injury after a fall, prevent complications and to provide emergency care. Procedure: 1. Resident will not be moved until a nurse evaluates the resident's condition. Review of Post-Fall Assessments, published by the American Association of Post-Acute Care Nursing, August 2021, revealed Before a resident can be moved, the nurse must assess them for an injury to the spinal column, obvious fractures, significant bleeding . Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #106, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: cerebral infarction…
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 before2024-06-25 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately notify the resident's physician of a change in condition in 1 of 4 residents (Resident #103) reviewed for physician notification, resulting in lack of assessment and physician involvement following two unwitnessed falls, with known head trauma. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #103 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia. Review of Resident #103's Nurse's Note dated 4/13/24 at 11:15 PM written by Registered Nurse (RN) N revealed, Resident kneeling at side of bed with forehead touching the floor .Resident does not know what happened. VSS (vital signs stable) and denies pain. Resident placed in wheelchair and brought to common area to observe. Hospice notified, (Director of Nursing (DON) B) notified and Guardian notified. At 11:45 PM while charting above note, this nurse heard sound behind and turned to find same resident on the floor. Raised bump at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-25 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake #'s MI00144035 and MI00144038. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from resident to resident physical abuse in 2 of 4 residents (Resident #105 and #104) reviewed for abuse, resulting in Resident #104 being physically abuse by Resident #105 twice in an 8 day period. Findings include: Review of a Facility Reported Incident dated 4/1/24 at 1:30 PM revealed, .Multiple staff witnessed (Resident #105) have her hands on (Resident #104's) shoulders. (Resident #105) was walking past (Resident #104) and stopped behind her, then placed her hands on (Resident #104's) shoulders .Investigation: .When asked why (Resident #105) touched (Resident #104) she stated, because she wanted (Resident #104) to know that people were watching her. (Resident #105) stated that she came behind (Resident #104) and placed her hands on (Resident #104's) shoulders and gave a little squeeze .When asked why (Resident #105) did this,…
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 before2024-06-25 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 recognize and report an injury of unknown origin for 1 resident (Resident #103) of 4 residents, reviewed for reporting, resulting in the lack of reporting and the potential for a delay in the investigation. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #103 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia. Review of Resident #103's Hospice Phone Communication Records dated 4/15/24 revealed, .facility stating patient woke up this morning complaining of right hip pain and they want to get an x-ray. I asked if they had some pain medication to treat the pain and she does so she will give the pain medication. I asked if she has fallen or injured her hip in any way and the CG (caregiver) is not aware of any injury. So at this time we will not order an X-ray but treat the pain and will let RNCM (registered nurse case manager) know of the request. Review of Resident #103's Progress Note…
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 before2024-06-25 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 complete and accurate documentation of post fall assessments for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #103) reviewed for complete and accurate medical documentation, resulting in the potential for insufficient follow up and lack of necessary interventions. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #103 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia. Review of Resident #103's Nurse's Note dated 4/13/24 at 11:15 PM revealed, Resident kneeling at side of bed with forehead touching the floor .Resident does not know what happened. VSS (vital signs stable) and denies pain. Resident placed in wheelchair and brought to common area to observe. Hospice notified, DON notified and Guardian notified. At 11:45 PM while charting above note, this nurse heard sound behind and turned to find same resident on the floor. Raised bump at right temple with purple center. No open abrasion. Placed 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.
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-26 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to employ either a full time Registered Dietitian or Certified Dietary Manager to provide oversight of kitchen and clinical nutritional services. This deficient practice has the increased potential to result in food service sanitation failures, food borne illness, or inadequate assessment of high-risk residents. Findings include: During an interview with Dietary Director (DD) W, at 8:58 AM on 3/25/24, it was found that she took over the position two to three years ago. When asked if she was a Certified Dietary Manager, DD W stated that she enrolled in the course in February of this year, but has had a hard time finding the time to take the classes outside of work, as she has been filling in spots where they have open positions or staff call ins. When asked how often there is a dietitian onsite, DD W stated that the dietitian comes here regularly, but she has a couple other buildings she goes to as well. Record review at this time confirmed that there was no Certified Dietary Manager records for DD W.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-26 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to: 1. Clean food and non-food contact surfaces to sight and touch; 2. Ensure proper cooling of potentially hazardous foods; 3. Ensure proper working order of the dish machine; 4. Provide accurate sanitizer test strips; 5. Maintain equipment in good repair; 6. Ensure general cleaning of the kitchen; 7. Properly wash hands and protect food from contamination; and 8. Properly date mark and discard food product. These conditions resulted in an increased risk of contaminated foods and an increased risk of food borne illness that affected 83 residents who consume food from the kitchen. Findings Include: 1. During a tour of the kitchen, at 9:14 AM on 3/25/24, observation of the top gaskets on unit #4 and unit #2 were observed with an accumulation of debris. During a tour of the kitchen, at 9:28 AM on 3/25/24, it was observed that the clean utensil drawer, containing mechanical scoops, was found with an accumulation of food debris and crumbs in 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 implement an effective infection control surveillance plan, ensure cleaning of shared equipment between residents, maintain resident equipment in clean condition, store resident care supplies in a manner to prevent the spread of infection, and prevent cross-connections for plumbing fixtures, with the potential to affect all 83 residents who reside at the facility, resulting in the potential for the spread of infection without timely identification and response, disease exposure, cross-contamination, and the development and spread of infection to a vulnerable population. Findings include: Review of the policy/procedure Infection Prevention and Control Program Overview, dated 7/11/18, revealed .The goals of the infection prevention and control program are to: A. Decrease the risk of infections and communicable diseases to residents, employees, volunteers and visitors. B. Monitor for occurrence of infection and communicable diseases and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-26 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 and post-fall assessments in 6 of 11 residents (Resident #135, #56, #77, #24, #78, & #65) reviewed for medication administration, and 1 of 3 residents (Resident #47) reviewed for falls, resulting in medications left unattended at the bedside, medications being pre-set for administration with the potential for medication errors and adverse effects, ordered medications not being delivered and administered, and neurological checks not being completed after an unwitnessed fall. Findings include: Review of the policy/procedure Medication Access and Storage, dated 7/11/18, revealed .It is the policy of this facility to store all drugs and biological in locked compartments under proper temperature controls. The medication supply is accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications .Only licensed…
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 · E2024-03-26 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 sufficient staff to meet resident needs in 2 of 5 residents (Resident #59 & #45) reviewed for sufficient staffing, with the potential for all residents to be affected, resulting in missed showers/baths, a lack of supervision of residents at risk for falls and elopement, and long call light wait times. For additional information see citations F677 and F689. Findings include: According to [NAME], [NAME] A.; [NAME], [NAME] Griffin; Stockert, [NAME]; Hall, [NAME]. Fundamentals of Nursing - E-Book (Kindle Locations 1589-1592). Elsevier Health Sciences. Kindle Edition.Time management, therapeutic communication, patient education, and compassionate implementation of bedside skills are just a few of the essential skills you need. It is important for your patients to leave the health care setting with a positive image of nursing and a feeling that they received quality care. Your patients should never feel rushed. They need to feel that…
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 · D2024-03-26 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure 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 ensure residents were free from physical restraints for staff convenience in 1 (Resident #60) of 3 residents reviewed for restraint use, resulting in potential for injury, and/or psychological harm. Findings include: Resident #60 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #60 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included alzheimer's disease with late onset. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #60, with a reference date of 2/8/24, revealed a Staff Assessment for Mental Status indicated that Resident #60 had short and long term memory problems, and her cognitive skills for daily decision making were severely impaired. Review of Resident #60's Orders revealed, Geri- chair (specialized recliner chair that is designed to assist with limited mobility) tray table for increased positioning. Start date: 9/7/23. During an observation on 3/24/24 at 11:56 AM, Resident #60 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-26 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 implement policies and procedures for reporting an allegation for potential abuse for 1 (Resident #64) of 18 residents reviewed for reporting, resulting in the potential for continued unidentified, unreported neglect to occur. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #64 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #64, with a reference date of 1/17/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7/15 which indicated Resident #64 was severely cognitively impaired. During an interview on 3/25/24 at 11:59 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) G reported that she had been made aware of an allegation that a staff member had used a gait belt to restrain Resident #64 in his wheelchair. CNA G reported that she believed the incident had been reported to management at the facility, because she recalled staff…
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 · D2024-03-26 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 obsevation, interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation into an alleged staff to resident abuse (restraint with gait belt to a wheelchair) for 1 (Resident #64) of 18 residents reviewed for abuse/neglect, resulting in an incomplete and thorough investigation and the potential for abuse to continue. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #64 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #64, with a reference date of 1/17/24, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7/15 which indicated Resident #64 was severely cognitively impaired. During an observation on 3/24/24 at 10:06 AM, Resident #64 was sitting in the main living room area on the unit in his wheelchair. Resident #64 was restless and attempted to stand up out of his wheelchair multiple times. It was noted that Resident #64 did not have a gait belt 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 · D2024-03-26 · 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 and implement person centered comprehensive care plans for 1 (Resident #33) of 18 residents reviewed for care plans, resulting in missed assessments and monitoring for potential side effects related to use of psychotropic medications. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #33 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included anxiety and major depression disorder. Review of Resident #33's Orders revealed, QUEtiapine Fumarate Oral Tablet 300 MG (Antipsychotic medication). Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime related to unspecified psychosis not due to a substance or known physiological condition. Start date: 2/29/24. Review of Resident #33's Orders on 3/24/24 did not reveal orders in place for monitoring of psychotropic medication side effects or antipsychotic behavior tracking. Review of Resident #33's Care Plan on 3/24/24 did not reveal a psychotropic medication use care plan.…
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 before2024-03-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 routine showers to dependent residents for 2 or 4 residents (Resident #45 and #59) reviewed for activities of daily living, resulting in residents feeling dirty and the potential for residents to not meet their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: Resident #45 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #45 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included urinary incontinence, muscle weakness, and alzheimers disease. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #45, with a reference date of 12/14/2023 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated Resident #45 was severely cognitively impaired. Further review of the same MDS assessment revealed Resident #45 required substantial assistance with bathing. In an interview on 3/26/2024 at 9:47 AM, Regional Nurse Consultant VV…
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 · D2024-03-26 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
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 appropriately maintain, store and label respiratory treatment supplies for 3 residents (Resident #8, #76 & #13) reviewed for respiratory care, resulting in the potential for respiratory infections and the exacerbation of respiratory conditions cross-contamination of respiratory equipment, and growth of infectious microorganisms. Findings include: Resident #8 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #8, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #8, with a reference date of 1/25/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7/15 which indicated Resident #8 was cognitively impaired. In an observation on 3/24/24 at 1:25 PM., Resident #8 was noted in her room sitting up on the side of her bed. Resident #8's nebulizer machine (delivers medications for respiratory…
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
$35,416 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $19,532 — penalty dated 2024-09-18
- $15,884 — penalty dated 2024-06-25
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to AVON HEALTHCARE — 9 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.2★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RENEWAL HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 05/10/2022 |
| GOTTLIEB, MOSHE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | 45% | since 05/10/2022 |
| KOENIG, JOSHUA | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/10/2022 |
| FREUND, ELIYAHU | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/10/2022 |
| RENEWAL MI MANAGMENT | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/10/2022 |
| MELDER, PATRICK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/15/2025 |
| WINGLER, CARTER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/09/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 70% 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 $956K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
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
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 235281. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-05, 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.