Marquette County Medical Care Facility

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

53.0% 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 49 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 77.5% 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 40 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 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 74% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 46% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 140 beds and averages 125.8 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 14 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 5.06 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.88 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.39 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.55 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.27 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.06 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 24% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

• Actual harm · G2024-06-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a care plan and offer/recommend diagnostic testing or consultation with a Gastroenterologist or Physician Specialist to determine the source of prolonged nausea and vomiting for one Resident (R16) of one Resident reviewed for change of condition. This deficient practice resulted in R16 sustaining a 27.3% weight loss in 6 months, a decline in activities of daily living (ADL), a significant change of condition, and the development of multiple pressure injuries. Findings include: Resident #16 (R16) R16 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 9/26/23, coded R16 as requiring staff assistance for activities of daily living (ADL), including partial staff assistance with ambulating, toileting, standing, and transfers. The MDS documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of 15, indicating R16 was cognitively intact. The quarterly MDS did not code R16 with weight loss. A…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-06-05 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide 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 and maintain interventions to prevent the development and progression of pressure ulcers (a wound affecting skin, fat, and muscle tissues) for two Residents (#62, #113) of three residents reviewed for pressure injuries. This deficient practice resulted in the development of three stage II pressure ulcers and worsening of pressure ulcers. Findings include: Resident #62 (R62): Review of R62's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed admission to the facility on 5/2/24 with diagnoses including a collapsed vertebra, muscle weakness, peripheral vascular disease, and diabetes. Review of R62's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicative of being cognitively intact. Further review of the MDS, section M, revealed R62 did not have pressure ulcers present upon admission. Review of R62's Braden Scale admission assessment (a standardized assessment…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2024-06-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement, update and revise comprehensive care plans to prevent falls for three Residents (#9, #26, #29) of three residents reviewed for falls. This deficient practice resulted in falls with major injury. Findings include: Resident #26 (R26) Review of R26's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed admission to the facility on 9/15/23 with diagnoses including dementia, left femur fracture, and history of falling. Review of R26's 9/21/23 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11/15, indicative of mild cognitive impairment. Further review of R26's MDS revealed she had a fall with fracture prior to admission to the facility. Review of R26's Fall Risk Assessment, dated 9/15/23 and completed on 9/20/23 revealed R26 scored a 19 presenting as a high risk for falls. Plan of Care for R26 read, in part, Resident has a fall risk score of 19. She has a history of 1 fall within the past month…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-06-05 · tag F0557 — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
  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 activities of daily living (ADL) care in a dignified manner to one Resident (R17) of twenty-five residents reviewed for dignity. Finding include: On 6/3/24 at 3:10 PM, an observation was made of CNA (certified nurse aide) D assisting R17 in his room to his bathroom on the toilet. On 6/3/24 at 3:15 PM an observation was made of R17 in his bathroom with the door open to the bathroom and the room door open. R17 was using the bathroom toilet. R17 was left unattended with both the bathroom door and room door open. On 6/3/24 at 3:17 PM, an observation was made of R57 entering R17's room in her wheelchair. Approximately one minute later CNA G redirected R57 out the room door of R17. On 6/3/24 at 3:20 PM, an interview was conducted with CNA G, and was asked if R17's door should be closed and replied, The other CNA could have, yeah. The other CNA should have closed it part way because R17 is a fall risk and if it was partially closed then she [R57] would not have gone in. On 6/3/24 at 3:25 PM, an interview was…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2023-06-29 · tag F0700 — pattern
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  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 appropriate and safe use of bedrails for nine Residents (R25, R31, R78, R84, R313, R314, R315, R501, and R502) beds, out of nine Residents reviewed for bed safety. This deficient practice resulted in the potential for inappropriate bedrail usage and bedrail entrapment. Findings include: During an observation on 6/27/23 at approximately 1:50 p.m., the following Resident beds were observed with bedrails: R25 - bilateral mobility bars. R31 - bilateral mobility bars. R78 - bilateral mobility bars. R84 - bilateral mobility bars. During an interview on 6/28/23 at 3:05 p.m., Physical Plant Manager (Staff) G was asked about bed entrapment zone measurements for residents with bedrails. Staff G said the facility did not perform entrapment zone gap measurements on resident beds if they did not have half bedrails on their beds. Residents with mobility bedrails did not have entrapment zone gap measurements performed as required per the facility policy. On 6/28/23 at 3:05 p.m., Staff G provided a form used for bed…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-06-29 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement the comprehensive, resident-centered risk for skin breakdown for two Residents (R32 and R93) of twenty-three residents reviewed for care plans. This deficient practice resulted in the development of two pressure injuries for R32 and the potential for R93 to develop a pressure injury. Findings include: Resident #32 (R32) R32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including generalized weakness, fracture of lower end of the left humerus (upper arm bone), fracture of left pubis (front pelvic area), dementia, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), and need for assistance with personal care. Review of R32's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/7/23, revealed the following: R32 required extensive, two-person physical assistance with bed mobility and was totally dependent on staff for transfers. Section M- Skin Conditions, revealed R32 was at risk for developing pressure ulcers and had…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide 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 prevent the development of avoidable pressure ulcers for one Resident (R32) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. This deficient practice resulted in the development of two pressure ulcers for R32, and the potential for complications such as infection and rehospitalization, related to pressure injuries. Findings include: Resident #32 (R32) R32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including generalized weakness, fracture of lower end of the left humerus (upper arm bone), fracture of left pubis (front pelvis area), dementia, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), and need for assistance with personal care. Review of R32's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/7/23, revealed the following: R32 required extensive, two-person physical assistance with bed mobility and was totally dependent on staff for transfers. Section M- Skin Conditions, revealed R32 was at risk for developing…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-06-29 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
  Ensure 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 ensure a medication error rate less that 5 percent with seven medication errors observed out of 26 opportunities during medication pass. This deficient practice resulted in a medication error rate of 26.92 percent and the potential for undesirable effects related to omission of medications for Resident #45 [R45]. Findings include: During an interview and observation on 6/28/23 at 7:36 a.m., Registered Nurse (RN) K, prepared the following medications for R45: Risperdal (liquid), 1 mg (milligram), once daily Valproic Acid (liquid) 2.5 MLs (milliliters), Miralax [Polyethylene glycol (bulk laxative)], 17 grams, mixed in (120 MLs) approximately four ounces of cranberry juice. All three medications were mixed together. RN K walked the cup of juice, mixed with medications, into R45's room and placed it on the Residents' overbed table. RN K walked out of the room and left the cup of all liquid medications at the bedside. When RN K was asked if…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 3 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

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.

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MI