The Laurels of Kent
350 N Center St, Lowell, MI 49331 · For profit - Corporation · 153 certified beds · (616) 897-8473 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Apr 2025
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 3 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $62,010 in federal fines (most recent 2023-10-25)
- about 19% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 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 improved from 2 to 3 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 | 11.3% | 10.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.1% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.8% | 0.8% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.6% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.0% | 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 | 2.3% | 3.0% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.5% | 12.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 4.3% | 19.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.9% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.6% | 5.1% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.4% | 20.0% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 12.6% | 14.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.6% | 1.1% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 88.9% | 79.5% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.4% | 24.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 18.3% | 11.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.58 | 1.84 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.10 | 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.
55.2% 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 28 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 75.0% 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 28 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 36% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 | 55.2%CMS range 42.5–69.6 | 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 | 10.4%CMS range 6.9–15.0 | 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 | 75.0% | 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 | 75.0% | 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 | 67.9% | 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 | 92.7% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 7.3% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 9.3%CMS range 5.3–16.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.80 | 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 153 beds and averages 93.8 residents a day — about 61% occupied, or roughly 59 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.09 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.95 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 2.90 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.17 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.52 to 0.24 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
38 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-04-09 · 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 This citation pertains to intake MI00151467. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to implement interventions, treatment, and monitoring for the prevention of pressure ulcers, prevent the development of pressure ulcers, implement monitoring to prevent the worsening of pressure ulcers, and implement treatment(s) to promote healing of pressure ulcers in 1 of 3 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for pressure ulcers, resulting in Resident #3 developing an unstageable pressure ulcer on the sacrum (tailbone) and an unstageable pressure ulcer on the right ear requiring hospitalization for a wound infection that lead to osteomyelitis (bone infection), gangrene (death of body tissue due to lack of blood flow or a serious bacterial infection) and ultimately the need for surgical intervention. Findings include: Resident #3 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #3 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included muscle weakness and diabetes mellitus. Review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-10-25 · 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 has 2 DPS statements, #1 and #2. DPS #1 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain professional standards when responding to an acute change in condition in 1 of 19 residents (Resident #54 ) reviewed for quality of care, when facility staff failed to ensure a physician was notified of Resident #54's extreme elevation in heart rate (pulse) and respirations, and adequately monitor and assess Resident #54 for further decline in health status, resulting in a delay in treatment and ultimately Resident #54 being found unresponsive, without an audible BP (blood pressure) or palpable pulse, and was transferred to the hospital via EMS (emergency medical services), where she later died. Findings include: Resident #54 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #54 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: cerebral infarction (stroke). Review of Resident #54's Advance Directive indicated to perform CPR (cardiopulmonary…
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 · G2023-10-25 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 COVID-19 immunization were offered to 2 (Resident #54 and #6) out of 5 residents, reviewed for COVID-19 immunizations, resulting in the increased likelihood of severe infection and complications/death related to COVID-19. Findings include: In an interview on [DATE] at 12:33 PM, NHA reported that the facility currently had 18 residents that were positive for COVID-19, and in droplet isolation. NHA reported that a COVID-19 outbreak began on [DATE], and a total of 56 residents have tested positive since then, with the most recent on [DATE]. NHA reported that two residents have died from COVID-19, Resident #54 and #6. Resident #6 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #6 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #6's admission Assessment dated [DATE] indicated that she had not received any doses of COVID-19 vaccine. Review of Resident #6's COVID-19 Vaccine consent revealed no consent or education. In an interview…
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 · F2026-02-24 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespreadKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to keep the dish machine in a state of repair that would allow for the machine's operational requirements to be met.Findings Include:On 2/22/26 at 10:00 AM, observation of the kitchen dish machine found that it was not reaching proper temperature or pressure for the wash and rinse cycles. A review of the machines' data plate (that shows the minimum requirements) found that the Wash temperature should be 150F - 160F, Rinse temperature should be 180F from the manifold (for a contact of 160F), and the final rinse pressure should be 20 pounds per square inch (psi). At this time, five cycles of the dish machine were run with the following characteristics observed: The wash cycle gauge showed between 140F-146F, the rinse pressure gauge showed between 35-50 psi, and the dish plate thermometer, which tracks the contact temperatures, showed contact temperatures of 137F-150F. A record review of the document entitled Dishmachine Temperature / Sanitizer…
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 · E2026-02-24 · 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 honor food preferences for 5 (Residents #106, 91, 31, 5, and 42) of 11 residents reviewed for dining resulting in being served disliked foods, frustration, decreased meal enjoyment, and the potential for unintended weight loss due to decreased oral intake.Findings include:Resident #106: Review of Resident #106's Brief Interview for Mental Status, dated 2/20/26, revealed a score of 15 which indicated she was cognitively intact. During an observation and interview on 02/22/2026 at 11:26 AM, Resident #106 was in her bed eating lunch. Resident #106 was served a salad that contained iceberg lettuce and tomatoes. On Resident #106's tray was a meal ticket (A slip of paper that noted the residents' diet order, likes, dislikes, and other meal information) that stated, .Only veggies (vegetables) preferred is (sic) broccoli, green beans and carrots. Resident #106 reported she hated tomatoes and didn't care for iceberg lettuce. Resident #106 confirmed the facility had taken down her preferences and they were…
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 · D2026-02-24 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 issue a Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN) for Medicare Part A services in 2 residents (Resident #73 and #92) of 3 residents, reviewed for timely provision of notifications, resulting in the potential for the resident or resident representative to be unaware of changes regarding financial liability, frustration, and a delay in the ability to file an appeal. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #73 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE].Review of Resident #73's SNF (skilled nursing facility) Beneficiary Protection Notification Review revealed, .Last covered day of Part A Service: 11/12/25 .The facility/provider initiated the discharge from Medicare Part A Services when benefit days were not exhausted .1. Was a SNF ABN, Form CMS-10055 provided to the resident? .No - if no, explain why the form was not provided: (no explanation recorded) .Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #92…
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 before2026-02-24 · 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 provide adequate supervision for 1 (Resident #5) of 5 residents reviewed for accidents and falls, resulting in the potential for injury.Findings include:Resident #5Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #5 was a male who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had pertinent diagnoses which included: mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology (source) and history of falling.Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #5, with a reference date of 1/15/2026 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8/15 which indicated Resident #5 was moderately cognitively impaired (8-12 moderate cognitive impairment). Review of section J: Health Conditions Falls- indicated that Resident #5 had experienced falls since admission.Review of Care Plan for Resident #5 revealed Resident #5 is at risk for fall related injury and falls R/T (related to): Deconditioning, fear of falling,…
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 · D2026-02-24 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 irregularities identified by the pharmacist were acted upon for 1 resident (Resident #2) of 5 residents, reviewed for unnecessary medications resulting in Resident #2 receiving an excessive dose of Escitalopram (antidepressant medication) and the potential for medication side effects including life threatening effects from QT (a measurement that shows the heart's electrical activity) prolongation (when the electrical system in your heart takes too long to recharge).Findings include:Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #2 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: schizophrenia (a serious mental health condition that results in a mix of hallucinations, delusions, and disorganized thinking and behavior) and bipolar disorder (a serious mental illness that causes unusual shifts in mood, ranging from extreme high episode to a low depressive episode). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS)…
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 · D2026-02-24 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
This citation pertains to intake #2713932.Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors in 1 (Resident #29) of 3 residents reviewed for pain management services, resulting in Resident #29 missing a dose of scheduled pain medication and experienced pain, frustration and difficulty sleeping. Findings include:Resident #29Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #29 had pertinent diagnoses which included: pain in the right knee and chronic pain.Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #29, with a reference date of 1/20/2026 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14/15 which indicated Resident #29 was cognitively intact. Review of section J: Health Conditions Pain Management for Resident #29 revealed a scheduled pain medication regimen, no PRN (as needed) pain medication use, with occasional pain occurring, and the worst being scored a 6 of 10 (10 being the worst pain ever experienced) in the previous 5 days of the assessment.Review of Physician Orders for Resident…
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 before2026-02-24 · 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 This citation pertains to intake #2713932Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation in a medical record for 2 (Resident #29 and #2) of 18 residents reviewed for accurate medical records, resulting in inaccurate documentation of the services provided and inaccurate physician notes. Findings include:Resident #29 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #29 was a female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had pertinent diagnoses which included: pain in the right knee and chronic pain. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #29, with a reference date of 1/20/2026 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14/15 which indicated Resident #29 was cognitively intact. Review of section J: Health Conditions Pain Management for Resident #29 revealed a scheduled pain medication regimen, no PRN (as needed) pain medication use, with occasional pain occurring, the worst being scored a 6 of 10 (10 being the worst…
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 before2025-08-28 · 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 This citation pertains to Intake 1326155.Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to have sufficient staffing to ensure resident care needs were responded to timely for 5 (Residents #1, 2, 6, 7, and 8) of 7 residents reviewed for sufficient staffing, and the potential to affect all those living at the facility of the facility census of 97 resulting in feelings of anger, frustration, and/or embarrassment.Findings include:Resident #1:During an interview on 8/26/25 at 11:51 AM, Resident #1 reported she had feelings of frustration when she had to wait prolonged times to receive staff assistance getting from her bed to her power chair. Resident #1 reported call light times are often not good (long and reported an example of waiting approximately one and a half hours. Resident #1 reported call light wait times are longest when she wanted to get up out of bed and into her power chair around lunch time.During observations and interviews starting on 8/27/25 at 9:18 AM, the call light monitor…
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 · E2025-04-15 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect 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 MI00152092. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to monitor and prevent resident to resident sexual abuse for 4 of 6 residents (Resident #101, #102, #104, and #105) reviewed for abuse, resulting in the potential for a decline in physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: Resident #101 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #101 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included personal history of traumatic brain injury and cognitive communication deficit. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #101, with a reference date of 3/17/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3/15 which indicated Resident #101 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Resident #101's Letter of Guardianship dated 12/18/24 indicated that Resident #101 was totally without the capacity to care for herself, and the court had granted Resident #101 a full guardian. Resident…
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 · E2025-04-15 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented the abuse policy by immediately reporting an allegation of abuse to the abuse coordinator for 4 of 6 residents (Resident #103, #104, #105 and #106) reviewed for abuse, resulting in a resident to resident allegation of sexual abuse not being reported immediately to the facility Abuse Coordinator and the potential for additional allegations of abuse to go unreported. Findings include: Resident #103 Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #103, with a reference date of 4/8/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7/15 which indicated Resident #103 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Resident #103's Letters of Guardianship dated 6/5/24 revealed that Resident #103 had been appointed a full guardian. Resident #104 Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #104, with a reference date of 3/26/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 4/15 which indicated Resident #104 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 25 citations
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 comprehensive, person centered care plans for 4 residents (Resident #102, #103, #104 and #105) of 6 residents reviewed, resulting in unmet care needs and the potential for negative physical, mental and psychosocial outcomes. 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 cognitive communication deficit and major depressive disorder. Review of the Facility Reported Incident (FRI) dated [DATE] revealed, On [DATE] at 10:00 PM, (Registered Nurse- RN) N observed (Resident #101) resident laying on (Resident #102's) bed with (Resident #2) in between (Resident #101) legs. (Resident #101) pants were off one leg and around her other ankle and (Resident #102) had his pajama and underpants down to his knees, his penis was not fully exposed. (Registered Nurse (RN) ) F immediately intervened and assisted (Resident…
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 · D2025-04-09 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure dignified verbal interactions between staff and resident for 1 (Resident #9) of 4 residents reviewed for dignity and respect resulting in negative emotional feelings and the potential for decreased self-worth or self-esteem. Findings include: Resident #9: Review of Resident #9's medical diagnoses, print date 4/9/25, included diagnoses of down syndrome and unspecified dementia. Review of Resident #9's brief interview for mental status score, dated 3/26/25, was scored 2 which indicated severe cognitive impairment. During an observation on 4/9/25 at 8:47 AM, Resident #9 was seated in her wheelchair in her room and was observed calling out verbally, moaning, crying, and stated, Ow, it hurts. Housekeeping staff F entered Resident #9's room as this was happening. Staff F asked what resident #9 needed and Resident #9 was unable to clearly state a care need to Staff F. Staff F then stated, We're not just gonna (going to) sit and cry, told…
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 · D2024-12-20 · 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
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to timely report an injury of unknown origin to the State Agency in 1 of 1 resident (Resident #94) reviewed for abuse, resulting in the potential for a delayed/incomplete investigation. Findings include: In an interview on 12/18/24 at 4:43 PM, Family Member L reported a concern involving a bruise on Resident #94's right inner thigh. Family Member L reported they noticed the bruise during a visit while Resident #94 was in the bathroom. Family Member L described the bruise as .huge . and reported when they asked the nurse what happened the facility had no explanation. Family Member L reported they were concerned that the large bruise to Resident #94's right inner thigh was not reported or investigated. Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #94 was a female, with pertinent diagnoses which included severe dementia with agitation, depression, anxiety, high blood pressure, heart disease, and muscle weakness. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #94, with a reference date of 9/24/24, revealed a Brief…
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 · D2024-12-20 · 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
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin in 1 of 1 resident (Resident #94) reviewed for abuse, resulting in an incomplete facility investigation. Findings include: In an interview on 12/18/24 at 4:43 PM, Family Member L reported a concern involving a bruise on Resident #94's right inner thigh. Family Member L reported they noticed the bruise during a visit while Resident #94 was in the bathroom. Family Member L described the bruise as .huge . and reported when they asked the nurse what happened the facility had no explanation. Family Member L reported they were concerned that the large bruise to Resident #94's right inner thigh was not reported or investigated. Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #94 was a female, with pertinent diagnoses which included severe dementia with agitation, depression, anxiety, high blood pressure, heart disease, and muscle weakness. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #94, with a reference date of 9/24/24, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental…
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 before2024-12-20 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for 2 (Resident #14 and #94) of 20 residents reviewed for medical records, resulting in an inaccurate reflection of personal hygiene acceptance, lack of nursing assessment documentation, and the potential for facility staff and providers not having all of the pertinent information to care for residents. Findings include: Resident #14 During an observation on 12/18/24 at 10:02 AM Resident #14 was lying in bed, his nails were very long, his facial hair was overgrown and the hair on his head was greasy and disheveled (messy). During an observation on 12/19/24 at 09:29 AM Resident #14 was lying in bed, his nails were long and dirty, and his facial hair had food substance in it. In an interview on 12/19/24 at 02:08 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) I reported that Resident #14 refused grooming of his hair and nails, and did not like to be touched. CNA I reported that Resident #14 verbalized no when staff offer to assist with hair and nails. In an interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-16 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake #MI00144277. Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and accurately implement the elopement policy in 3 of 5 residents (Resident #203, #208, & #209), reviewed for safety and monitoring, resulting in the potential for injury. Findings include: Review of the facility document Elopement Residents indicated 17 residents that were at risk for elopement and were currently wearing wanderguard bracelets. Resident #203, #208, and #209 were included on the list. Resident #203 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #203 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: stroke and seizure disorder. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #203, with a reference date of 4/11/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated Resident #203 was cognitively impaired. Review of the Functional Abilities…
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 · E2023-10-25 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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: 1.) provide appropriate and adequate tracheostomy care, 2.) maintain oxygen delivery rate, and 3.) maintain oxygen delivery equipment for infection control in 4 of 4 residents (Resident #50, Resident #24, Resident #10, and Resident #11) reviewed for respiratory care, resulting in the potential for breathing complications and respiratory infections. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], R50 was in a persistent comatose state, unable to participate in his BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) was totally dependent on staff for all care needs including turning/positioning, with diagnoses that included anoxic brain injury (lack of oxygen to the brain) and quadriplegia. Review of R50's Order Summary -10/21/2023 apply 4 x 4 gauze under right side of patient's neck and under the foam trach ties to prevent pressure every shift for Trach (tracheostomy) foam ties pressure prevention -10/3/2023 suction trach as…
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 · E2023-10-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
R50 Review of R50's Order Summary -10/21/2023 apply 44 gauze under right side of patient's neck and under the foam trach ties to prevent pressure every shift for Trach (tracheostomy) foam ties pressure prevention -10/3/2023 suction trach as needed -10/20/2023 trach care to be performed. Change inner cannula using size 4 every shift Review of R50's Care Plan, 12/16/2022, the resident had a potential for difficulty breathing and risk for respiratory complications related to NPO (nothing by mouth) status, and aspiration risk (taking in foreign material into the lungs), tracheostomy (procedure to help air and oxygen reach the lungs by creating an opening into the trachea (windpipe) from outside the neck via a tube), brain injury, with seizure risk. The goal was to display optimal breathing pattern daily/no labored breathing. To meet this goal, interventions to be implemented included, tracheostomy care per policy, provide good oral hygiene to prevent infection, PPE (personal protection equipment such as gloves) per protocol, observe for signs/symptoms including increased in sputum…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-25 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were in reach for 1 (Resident #19) of 19 residents reviewed for call light placement, resulting in the inability to call for staff assistance, resident frustration, and unmet care needs. Findings include: Resident #19 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #19 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included anxiety and history of falling. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #19, with a reference date of 7/17/23, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3/15 which indicated Resident #19 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of the Functional Status with a reference date of 7/1/723, revealed that Resident #19 required extensive assistance of one person for dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Review of Resident #19's Care Plan revealed, (Resident #19) is at risk for fall related injury and falls R/T (related to): DX…
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 before2023-10-25 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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: 1.) notify a physician of a missed medication dose 2.) failed to enter physician order for a change in oxygen flow rate 3.) obtain a re-weight for a resident with potential nutritional concerns in 2 (Resident #11 and Resident Resident #73) of 19 residents reviewed for standards of practice, resulting in the potential for worsening of health conditions. Findings include: Resident #11 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #11, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included vascular dementia and major depressive disorder. During an observation and interview on 10/23/23 at 8:07 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Q reported that Resident #11 had an order to receive acetaminophen (Tylenol) rectal suppository for a fever and discomfort. LPN Q reported that he would need to skip administering the Tylenol until he could find a staff member to assist him because Resident #11 was sitting up 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 · Dcited before2023-10-25 · 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 `This citation pertains to intake: MI00139865 Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure PRN (as needed) oral care was performed for 1 of 19 resident (R50) reviewed for ADL (activities of daily living), resulting in dried oral secretions, dry cracked lips, and the potential of gum disease. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], R50 was in a persistent comatose state, unable to participate in his BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) was totally dependent on staff for all care needs including turning/positioning, with diagnoses that included anoxic brain injury (lack of oxygen to the brain) and quadriplegia. Review of R50's Care Plan, revised 8/18/2023, the resident had ADL (activities-of-daily-living) Self-Care Performance Deficit and required total assistance with ADLs and mobility related to diagnoses of anoxic brain injury (complete lack of oxygen to the brain) and quadriplegia (paralyzed in all four limbs). The goal was to have ADL needs…
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 before2023-10-25 · 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 This citation pertains to intake: MI00139865 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement and revise pressure ulcer interventions for 1 of 2 residents (R50) reviewed for skin integrity, resulting in the potential of an impaired skin integrity condition. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], R50 was in a persistent comatose state, unable to participate in his BIMS (Brief Interview Mental Status) was totally dependent on staff for all care needs including turning/positioning, with diagnoses that included anoxic brain injury (lack of oxygen to the brain) and quadriplegia. Review of R50's Care Plan, revised 8/18/2023, reported the resident was at risk for impaired skin integrity/pressure injury related to diagnoses of quadriplegia and anoxic brain damage (lack of oxygen to the brain). The resident was dependent of staff for positioning/turning and had braces for contractures. The goal was to minimize risk to reduce likelihood of pressure…
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 before2023-10-25 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safety precautions were in place and accurate in 1 of 1 residents (Resident #48) reviewed for safety, resulting in the potential for elopement. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #48 was a male with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia, impulse disorder, and psychotic disorder with delusions. Review of current Care Plan for Resident #48, revised on 9/1/2023, revealed the focus, .(Resident #48) is at risk for exit seeking. He has a history of attempts to leave facility unattended. (Resident #48) wears a wander guard on right front of wheelchair to ensure safety . with the intervention .Apply wander guard per order. Check placement, function and expiration date per facility protocol. Wander guard to: Left wrist .Distract resident when wandering into inappropriate areas by offering pleasant diversions, structured activities, food, conversation etc .Observe wandering behavior and attempted diversional interventions when wandering into inappropriate locations such as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-25 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
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 pre and post dialysis (procedure that removes excess water, solutes, and toxins from the blood in people whose kidneys cannot perform these functions) assessments were completed for 1 (Resident #42) of 1 resident reviewed for dialysis care, resulting in the potential of being unprepared for a potential decline in resident condition, due to the adverse effects from dialysis. Findings include: Resident #42 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #42, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included end stage renal disease. Review of Resident #42's Dialysis Care Plan dated 7/27/22 revealed, (Resident #42) is at risk for complications R/T (related to) needs dialysis due to: ESRD (End Stage Renal Disease) with AV fistula (surgically created vascular access area for dialysis treatments) left upper arm (M,W,F) . Interventions: Do not draw blood or take B/P in left arm, Encourage resident to go for 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 · D2023-10-25 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure PRN (as needed) orders for psychotropic drugs were limited to 14 days and/or document the rationale in the resident's medical record and indicate the duration for the PRN order for 1 (Resident #29) of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, resulting in the prolonged use of psychotropic medication and the potential for residents to receive unnecessary psychotropic medications. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #29, was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included major depressive disorder and schizophrenia. Review of Resident #29's Orders revealed, Misc Natural Products External Gel (Misc Natural Products) Apply to wrists topically every 6 hours as needed for Schizophrenia. Risperidone gel 0.25 mg/1 ml: apply 0.5 mL. Start Date: 07/09/2023. During an interview on 10/24/23 at 9:23 AM, Social Worker (SW) II reported that the Risperidone PRN gel was an active order…
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 before2023-10-25 · 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 maintain complete and accurate medical records for 3 of 19 residents (Resident #54, #11 and #29) reviewed for comprehensive and accurate medical records, resulting in an inaccurate reflection of the resident's medical conditions and needs, and the potential for providers to not have an accurate picture of resident status and condition. Findings include: Resident #54 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #54 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: cerebral infarction (stroke). In an interview on 10/24/23 at 08:51 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) H reported that a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) had reported abnormal vital signs for Resident #54 on 10/16/23 around 6:45 PM, and LPN H rechecked the vital signs and got the same readings; Respirations 32, Pulse (heart rate) 114. LPN H reported that she sent a text message regarding the abnormal vital signs to the on-call provider and stated,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-20 · 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 a care plan to reflect current actual skin impairment for 1 resident (Resident #4) of 4 residents reviewed for accuracy of care plans, resulting in the potential for staff to provide care that was inconsistent with the needs of the resident. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #4 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia and depression. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #4, with a reference date of 8/30/2023 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated Resident #4 was severely cognitively impaired. In an observation on 9/19/2023 in Resident #4's room at 3:33 PM, Resident #4 had a bordered foam dressing on her right foot dated 9/18/2023. Review of Resident #4's Wound Care Progress Note dated 9/18/2023 at 5:40 PM revealed #4's treatment recommendations for right foot…
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 before2023-09-20 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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 obtain a physician order to reflect current wound treatment for 1 resident (Resident #4) of 4 residents reviewed for skin conditions, resulting in the potential for residents to have received inappropriate care and the potential for residents to not meet their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #4 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia and depression. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #4, with a reference date of 8/30/2023 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated Resident #4 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of a list of facility residents with ordered skin treatments received from the facility on 9/19/2023 revealed Resident #4 had an order to apply skin prep to her right foot wound and leave…
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 before2023-09-20 · 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 MI00139243 and MI00139388. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to identify, monitor and treat a skin condition for 1 (Resident #1) of 4 residents reviewed for skin treatment, resulting in lack of assessment, monitoring, and documentation and the potential for worsening of the condition and delay of treatment. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included epilepsy, dementia, and cerebral palsy. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #1, with a reference date of 7/19/2023 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated Resident #1 was moderately cognitively impaired. In a telephone interview on 9/18/2023 at 2:56 PM, Guardian of Resident #1 Q reported Resident #1 went to the local hospital emergency department on 8/20/2023 after having a seizure and falling at the facility 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 · F2023-09-06 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
This citation pertains to intake: MI00133188, MI00136070, & MI00137867 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to assure a registered nurse was on duty for eight consecutive hours a day seven days a week, resulting in the potential for a decrease in the quality of care for all residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the Timecard Report for the period of 8/4/23 to 9/4/23 revealed there was no RN coverage providing direct resident care (zero hours logged) on 8/8/23, 8/17/23, 8/18/23, 8/25/23, and 8/31/23. In an interview on 09/06/23 at 3:35 PM, Regional Clinical Coordinator (RCC) C reported the facility was aware they don't have the needed staffing in the building. RCC C reported as the Director of Nursing she had a process in place to ensure the facility had RN covered for the minimum of 8 hours for a 24 hour period of time. RCC C' reported when the staffing was reported to CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid) it would tell those days when there was not registered nurse coverage.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-06 · 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 This citation pertains to intake MI00133188, MI00136070, & MI00137867 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate nurse staffing to promote the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being in 4 of 9 sampled residents (Resident #100, #103, #107, & #108) reviewed for staffing, resulting in unmet care needs and the potential for physical and psychosocial harm for all residents in the facility. Findings include: Review of Resident Census and Conditions of Residents (CMS Form 672) submitted for review on 9/5/2023 indicated a census of 86 residents, revealed there were 83 residents were either an Assist of One or Two Staff or Dependent on staff for bathing; 66 residents were either an Assist of One or Two Staff or Dependent on staff for dressing; 52 residents were either an Assist of One or Two Staff or Dependent on staff for transferring; and 65 residents were an Assist of One or Two Staff for toilet use; 14 residents were either an Assist of One or Two Staff or…
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 before2023-09-06 · 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 This citation pertains to Intake: MI00133188 & MI00136070 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was consistently provided with showers/bathing for 2 of 9 residents (Resident #103 and #108) and 1 of 1 residents (Resident #107) with eating assistance reviewed for activities of daily living, resulting in unmet personal hygiene needs and the potential for weight loss. Findings include: According to [NAME], [NAME] A.; [NAME], [NAME] Griffin; Stockert, [NAME]; Hall, [NAME]. Fundamentals of Nursing - E-Book (Kindle Locations 50742-50744). Elsevier Health Sciences. Kindle Edition.Personal hygiene affects patient's comfort, safety, and well-being. Hygiene care included cleaning and grooming activities that maintain personal body cleanliness and appearance. Personal hygiene activities which as taking a bath or shower and brushing and flossing the teeth also promote comfort and relaxation foster a positive self-image, promote healthy skin, and help prevent infection and disease .…
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 before2023-09-06 · 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 utilize wheelchair footrests for safe wheelchair transport in 2 of 2 residents (Resident #105 & Resident #106) reviewed for accidents and hazards, resulting in the potential for falls and injury. Findings include: Review of Mosby's Textbook for Long-Term Care Nursing Assistants - E-Book by [NAME] A. [NAME], 6th Edition 2013 titled 'Wheelchair Safety revealed .Make sure the person's feet are on the footplates (foot pedals/rests) before moving the chair. The person's feet must not touch or drag on the floor when the chair is moving . Resident #105: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #105 was a female with pertinent diagnoses which included stroke, osteoarthritis of right hip, paralysis affecting left side, vascular dementia with agitation, and seizure. Review of current Care Plan for Resident #105, revised on 11/03/2022, revealed the focus, .(Resident #105) is at risk for decline in cognition and has impaired cognitive function…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-06 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
This citation pertains to Intake: MI00133188 & MI00136070 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly assess and provide care per the standards of care for an indwelling catheter in 1 (Resident #103) of 3 residents reviewed for indwelling catheter care, resulting in the potential of a urinary tract infection. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #103 was a male with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia, anxiety, chronic kidney disease, proteus mirabilis (bacterium causing bacteremia (bacteria in the bloodstream) and sepsis (a life threatening complication of an infection), kidney stones, and history of recurrent UTIs (urinary tract infections). Review of current Care Plan for Resident #103, revised on 3/31/2022, revealed the focus, .(Resident #103) is at risk for urinary tract infection and catheter-related trauma: has foley catheter .(Resident #103) has tendency to touch his catheter with hands . with the intervention .Change catheter tubing per facility policy .Observe/record/report to physician for s/sx…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2024-12-20 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to post required nurse staffing information on a daily basis, for all 98 residents in the facility, resulting in a lack of available staffing information for residents and visitors. Findings include: In an observation and review of the posting Report of Nursing Staff Directly Responsible for Patient Care document, in the main entryway of the facility on 12/18/24 and 12/19/24, revealed no information recorded in the total hours columns of the document. In an interview on 12/19/24 at 09:53 AM, Medical Records/Scheduler (MRS) JJ reported that she was responsible for posting the daily staffing report. MRS JJ reported that she only recorded the number of staff, and did not know to include how many hours they were working on that day. In an interview on 12/20/24 at 12:31 PM, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A reported that she did not know to the nursing hours needed to be reflected on the posting.
“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
$62,010 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $62,010 — penalty dated 2023-10-25
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2023-11-22 for 14 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CIENA HEALTHCARE/LAUREL HEALTH CARE — 81 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 | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 80 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 80; lowest-rated first.
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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| LAUREL HEALTH CARE HOLDINGS, INC. | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 02/01/2016 |
| QAZI, MOHAMMAD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/01/2016 |
| KHAN, ANIS | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/01/2016 |
| CIENA HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2021 |
| DI REZZE, JUSTIN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2025 |
| STEPHENS, NANCY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/03/2017 |
| DEUTSCH, NEAL | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/23/2025 |
| GARDINA, ANNA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/23/2025 |
| STOBB, DAVID | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 9 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.
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.
This home reported $2.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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 235253. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-24, 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.