Manistee County Medical Care Facility
1505 East Parkdale Avenue, Manistee, MI 49660 · Government - County · 78 certified beds · (231) 723-2543 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (31% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 29.6% | 10.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| 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 | 2.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.5% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.0% | 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 | 6.4% | 3.0% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 33.5% | 12.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.4% | 19.4% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.5% | 5.1% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.1% | 20.0% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.3% | 14.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.1% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.3% | 24.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 21.2% | 11.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.00 | 1.84 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.99 | 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.
50.1% 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 68 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.49 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 80% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% 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 | 50.1%CMS range 38.4–59.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.5%CMS range 8.1–17.4 | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.2%CMS range 3.2–10.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.85 | 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 78 beds and averages 34.5 residents a day — about 44% occupied, or roughly 44 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 6.28 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 2.32 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.85 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.84 on weekdays — 29% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 2.71 to 1.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 31% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-04 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#31) of five residents reviewed for eligible immunizations was offered a pneumococcal vaccine as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).Findings Include:Resident #31 (R31)Review of the electronic medical record (EMR) for R31, revealed initial admission to the facility on 7/19/16 with diagnoses including multiple sclerosis, dementia, and failure to thrive. The most recent pneumococcal immunization for R31 was administered on 6/27/17. The status of the next pneumococcal immunization read, refused.Review of R31's vaccination history on the Michigan Care Improvement Registry (MCIR), revealed the recommended date for the PCV20/PCV21(Pneumococcal 20-valent Conjugate/Pneumococcal 21-valent conjugate) vaccine was 6/27/22.No education regarding the benefits and risks of the immunization or declination of a pneumococcal immunization being offering could be located in R31's EMR.On 12/3/25 at 12:48 PM, an interview was conducted with Infection Preventionist (IP) B regarding R31's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the provision of dignified care and services for five Confidential Residents (C1, C2, C3, C4, and C5)) out of 13 residents reviewed for dgnity. This deficient practice resulted in feelings of intimidation, frustration, and fear of retaliation from facility staff. Findings include: Confidential Resident C2 Review of C2's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 9/23/24, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 of 15, reflective of intact cognition. During an interview on 10/07/24 at 12:29 p.m., Confidential Resident C2 was asked about the provision of dignified and respectful care and services by facility staff. C2 initially spoke in a whisper and said she did not want to discuss it, but then motioned this Surveyor closer and said there was one staff member that did not like her and did not treat her properly. When asked who the staff member was, C2 noted it was Staff T, who had refused to clean up a beverage C2 had spilled at lunch. C2 said she had spilled a lunch beverage, and it was all over…
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 · D2024-10-09 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This deficiency pertains to Intake MI00147245 and MI147343 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the state agency timely of reportable occurrences for one Residents (R199) of two residents reviewed for abuse. Findings include: Resident #199 On 9/26/24 at 1:00 a.m., Resident #199 (R199) was found unresponsive in his wheelchair. A nurse's progress note dated 9/26/24 at 1:44 a.m. documented R199 had been resting in his wheelchair until 1:00 a.m. when staff approached R199 about going to bed. Documentation in nurse progress notes indicate R199's arms and legs were flaccid, and the resident had a blank gaze when staff performed sternal rubbing. R199 was transferred to the Emergency Department (ED) on 9/26/24 at 1:35 a.m. where a urine drug screen (UDS) was performed. The results of the UDS were positive for cocaine. The ED physician documented, in part: .I reviewed the nursing home note and also his medication list. Nothing can account for the cocaine in his urine .A confirmation test…
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 · D2024-10-09 · tag F0659 — isolatedProvide care by qualified persons according to each resident's written plan of care.
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 invasive blood sugar (glucometer) testing and insulin injections were administered by licensed nursing staff for one Resident (R19) out of 13 residents reviewed for qualified staffing. This deficient practice resulted in Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) B providing care outside the scope of practice when they administered insulin via injection and completed invasive blood glucose monitoring for R19. Findings include: During an interview on 10/08/24 at 9:22 a.m., R19 said [CNA B] came into their room and gave them two insulin shots. R19 stated, [CNA B] gave me the insulin . [CNA B] came in and gave it (insulin) to me on one side . and then came in later and gave it to me on the other side. This happened in May or June. It is almost like a bad dream . I knew it wasn't right . Review of R19's Physician Order Summary, as of 10/9/24, revealed the following orders to be administered by licensed nursing staff, in part: Humalog Injection Solution 100 Unit/ML (milliliter) (Insulin Lispro) Inject as per sliding scale; if 0-100 = 0…
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 · D2024-10-09 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary standards of care and services for diabetes management in one Resident (Resident #37) of one resident reviewed for diabetic management. This deficient practice resulted in the potential for diabetic related complications including organ damage, stroke, and death. Findings include: Resident #37 (R37) Review of R37's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed admission to the facility on 2/14/24 with diagnoses including Type 2 diabetes mellitus. R37's 8/19/24 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2, indicative of severe cognitive impairment. R37 was also noted to have received seven insulin injections in Section N of the 8/19/24 MDS assessment. Review of R37's Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the following: Basaglar Tempo Pen Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector 100 Unit/ML (milliliters) (Insulin Glargine) Inject 20 unit subcutaneously one time a day for DM (diabetes mellitus) HumaLOG Injection Solution 100 UNIT/ML…
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 · D2024-10-09 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide appropriate support surfaces for residents with wounds, develop care plan interventions for pressure-reducing support surfaces, accurately document the stage of a pressure injury, and provide ongoing weekly skin assessments for one (Residents R43) of four residents reviewed for pressure injury, resulting in the potential for worsening pressure ulcers. Findings include: Resident #43 On 10/7/24 at 12:20 p.m., Resident #43 (R43) said she hurt, and indicated the pain was in her gluteal area. R43 was sitting in a recliner with no visible chair cushion on the recliner. The mattress on R43's bed was a standard facility mattress. R43 was unable to answer questions regarding potential skin impairment. R43 had a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed on 7/22/24. The MDS documented R43 was dependent on staff for Activities of Daily Living (ADL), including dependence on staff for bed mobility, turning and repositioning. Physician's orders for R43 included treatment orders for a Stage 4…
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 · D2024-10-09 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement interventions to address range of motion (ROM) for one resident (Resident #11) of two residents reviewed for limited range of motion. This deficient practice resulted in the potential for extreme pain, discomfort, and worsening of positions. Findings include: Review of R11's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed an admission date of 3/17/20 and diagnoses including cerebral palsy, epilepsy, anoxic brain damage, and anxiety disorder. Review of R11's 8/19/24 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed they were unable to complete the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score and was marked with severely impaired cognition. In Section O of the 8/19/24 MDS, R11 was noted to have received zero days of treatment for therapy services and restorative nursing program services. On 10/7/24 at approximately 3:00 p.m., R11 was observed sitting in her bed watching television. R11's bed was noted to be elevated at the head. R11 was nonverbal during this interaction but was observed with her head…
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 before2024-10-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all medications and biologicals were stored in locked compartments accessible only by authorized personnel in one medication room, of one medication storage room reviewed during the medication storage task. This deficient practice resulted in the potential for medication diversion when the medication room door was propped open without supervision and the medication refrigerator was unlocked and utilized for staff food items. Findings include: During an observation on 10/09/24 at 7:27 a.m. the second floor medication storage room was found propped wide open and unattended by any facility staff. This Surveyor walked into the medication storage room without supervision. Registered Nurse (RN) S, upon seeing this Surveyor walked into the second floor medication room. RN S acknowledged the medication room door was not supposed to be left open, unattended, and stated, I already shut this door once. When the unlocked, medication refrigerator was opened, three small plastic, storage containers with food, an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to adhere to Enhanced Barrier Precautions and follow infection control standards of practice in 2 of 2 residents (Resident #43 and Resident #12) review for infection control, resulting in the potential for the spread of infection. Findings include: Resident #43 Signage was posted outside the door to R43's room that read, in part, .Enhanced Barrier Precautions [EBP] . Put on PPE [Personal Protective Equipment] before entering for high contact care: 1. Hand Hygiene 2. Gown 3. Gloves . On 10/9/24 at 9:50 a.m., the Wound Nurse (Registered Nurse (RN) M) was observed completing treatments and dressing changes to R43's pressure injuries. The sacral wound was observed to be a Stage 3 pressure injury without a dressing. A stage 2 pressure injury was observed on the right buttock lateral to the superior gluteal fold. RN M wore gloves but did not wear a gown throughout the dressing change procedure in accordance with EBP instructions. Resident #12 Resident #12 (R12) had a stage 3 pressure injury on the right gluteus. EBP…
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 · E2023-11-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 prevent proper supervision of coffee carts for three of four hallways during an observation of the lunch service meal. This deficient practice resulted in the potential for residents who were deemed unsafe to handle hot liquids independently, to subsequently suffer burns and burn related medical complications. Findings include: An observation was made of the lunch meal service on 11/14/23 at 11:50 a.m. During this time, carts were being delivered to their designated hallways. Observation of the first cart for rooms 101-116 with three staff members assisting in passing the hallway meals. It was observed that Registered Nurse (RN) D prepared coffee from a separate coffee cart, placing the coffee cups without lids on top of the trays, and then allowing the trays to go into resident rooms. After all meals were delivered, the coffee cart was left unattended in the hallway. An observation was made of the second hallway cart for rooms 117-131 on 11/1/243 at 12:00 p.m. RN D was again assisting in pouring coffee into…
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 before2023-11-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to securely store medications, for Resident #6 (R6), two of two medication rooms and one of two medication carts reviewed. This deficient practice resulted in the potential for expired medication use and misappropriation of Resident property. Findings include: On 11/14/23 at 12:35 PM, an observation was made of Resident #6 (R6) in her room. R6 was sitting up in her wheelchair and watching television. R6 had a dresser just to the right of her doorway and on top of the dresser was a plastic container with various items inside. Inside R6's plastic container on her dresser, two tubes of diphenhydramine cream and one tube of hydrocortisone cream were observed. R6 was asked why she had the creams in her room and replied, I use them for itching and for the rash on my back, and the Certified Nurse Aides will rub it on my back. On 11/15/23 at 7:50 AM, an observation was made of R6's room, and the three tubes of cream remained on top of her dresser inside the plastic container. A review of R6's care plan, physician…
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 · D2023-11-15 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a medication administration error rate less than 5%, for 3 of 25 medication administrations. This deficient practice resulted in a medication administration error rate of 12.00%, with the potential for medical complications in resident treatment and conditions. Findings include: On 11/15/23 at 9:45 AM, an observation was made of Registered Nurse (RN) D preparing medication pass for Resident #15 (R15) in the medication storage room on the first floor. RN D grabbed a tray to place individual medication cups on, with one medication per cup, crushed, and dissolved in a small amount of water. RN D prepared three medications from a stock source including: aspirin, multivitamin, and vitamin D. RN D then grabbed a packet of medication pre-prepared by pharmacy which contained four medications. RN D opened the packet and dumped the medications in a cup and spilled three on the floor. RN D failed to notice she dropped three of the four medications on the floor. RN D dropped two white pills and one pink pill…
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 · C2024-10-09 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete, post, and retain the required daily nurse staffing information. This deficient practice resulted in the inability of residents and visitors to determine the number of staff available to provide resident care and had the potential to affect all 45 residents in the facility. Findings include: A review of the Daily Nursing Staff sheets from July - August, provided by the Director of Nursing (DON), revealed no postings were completed for the following dates: July (2024) 1, 3-7, 9, 11-14, 16-21, 23-25, 27-29, 31; and August (2024) 2-19, 21, 22, 24-26, 28, 31; and September (2024) 1, 2, 6-8, 10-16, 18, 19, 21-30. It was noted staffing sheets were not completed, posted, or retained on 73 of 92 days reviewed. On 10/9/24 at 10:37 AM, an interview was conducted with Nursing Administrative Assistant/Scheduler R who verified she was in responsible for completing and retaining the daily nursing staff postings. Scheduler R stated she worked on a part-time basis and only completes the required daily nurse staffing information…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BIELSKI, LARRY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 11/10/2014 |
| MCELRATH, HATTIE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 10/01/2017 |
| PARKES, DOUGLAS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/01/2012 |
| MANISTEE COUNTY | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/1960 |
| CABOT, CASSANDRA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/05/2023 |
| COLE, SHANNON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/27/2021 |
| COLEMAN, JOE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/21/2014 |
| FALK, CRYSTAL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/26/2024 |
| HILLIARD-JOHNSON, MELLISSA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/28/2022 |
| MCCANN, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/31/2023 |
| NEAL, TRACY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/21/2024 |
| SCHLAFLEY, JILLIAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/19/2024 |
| SEKURIS, DAWN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/24/2023 |
| SULLIVAN, RYAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/18/2025 |
| TAYLOR, BETH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/13/2008 |
| WISSNER, JACKIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/10/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 75% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. 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 235003. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-04, 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.