Autumnwood of McBain
220 South Hughston Street, McBain, MI 49657 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 95 certified beds · (231) 825-2990 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (36% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- it has 3 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $39,000 in federal fines (most recent 2025-03-26)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- about 18% 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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 22.7% | 10.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.7% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.6% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.2% | 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 | 2.7% | 3.0% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.5% | 12.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 15.3% | 19.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.4% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.9% | 5.1% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 31.9% | 20.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.5% | 14.8% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 1.1% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.9% | 79.5% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 12.2% | 24.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 15.0% | 11.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.92 | 1.84 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.55 | 1.64 | 1.80 | better |
§ 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.
44.2% 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 88 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 13.0% 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 23 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 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 17% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% 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 | 44.2%CMS range 36.3–53.5 | 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 | 9.6%CMS range 6.5–13.6 | 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 | 13.0% | 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 | 17.4% | 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 | 4.3% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 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 | 7.3%CMS range 3.6–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.63 | 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 95 beds and averages 89.7 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.39 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.79 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.16 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 3.10 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.51 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.91 to 0.50 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% 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 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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2025-05-27 · tag F0711 — isolatedEnsure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
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 the physician reviewed medication orders for accuracy for one Resident (#3) of three residents reviewed for physician visits. This deficient practice resulted in Resident #3 experiencing a significant medication error and subsequent severe adverse effects. Findings include: This citation pertains to intake numbers: MI00153136 and MI00153196. Resident #3 (R3) Review of R3's face sheet revealed admission to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including, cirrhosis (chronic liver damage), diabetes mellitus, hypertension (elevated blood pressure), hypothyroidism (not producing enough thyroid hormone), and Parkinson's disease (central nervous system disorder affecting movement). Review of complaint intake number MI00153136 submitted to the State Agency (SA), dated [DATE] revealed, R3 was admitted to (skilled nursing facility name) on [DATE] and discharged on [DATE]. Upon discharge from an acute care hospital, R3 was ordered to receive…
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 · G2025-05-27 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately transcribe and double check admission medications per standards of practice for one Resident (#3) of three residents reviewed for new admissions. This deficient practice resulted in Resident #3 experiencing a significant medication error and subsequent severe adverse effects. Findings include: This citation pertains to intake numbers: MI00153136 and MI00153196. Resident #3 (R3) Review of complaint intake number MI00153136 submitted to the State Agency (SA), dated [DATE] revealed, R3 was admitted to (skilled nursing facility name) on [DATE] and discharged on [DATE]. Upon discharge from an acute care hospital, R3 was ordered to receive Carbidopa/Levodopa five times per day and Levothyroxine once a day. Upon admission to [Nursing Home Facility], the medication frequencies were transposed which resulted in R3 receiving the incorrect dosage of both Carbidopa/Levodopa and Levothyroxine. R3 was supposed to receive Carbidopa/Levodopa five times 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.
- Actual harm · H2025-03-26 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to Intakes MI00150419 and MI00151063. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate staffing to promote the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being in 19 residents (#37, #51, #7, #87, #35, #36, #42, #48, #65, #81 and nine confidential residents) reviewed for staffing. This deficient practice resulted in actual harm for Residents #37, #7, #35, #42, and #48 who were forced to lay in their own excrement or urine for extended periods of time or delay a bowel movement due to insufficient staffing, resulting in reported feelings of frustration, helplessness, humiliation, and anger and/or inference of these feelings based on the reasonable person concept. Findings include: Resident #37 (R37) Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/10/2025, revealed R37 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R37 was dependent (helper does all of the effort, resident does none of the effort to complete the activity) for ADLs (activities of daily…
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 · D2025-05-27 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 identify harmful dosing parameters and recognize the resulting side effects for an incorrectly prescribed thyroid medication for one Resident (#3) of 3 residents reviewed for .three residents reviewed for new admissions. Findings include: This citation pertains to intake numbers: MI00153136 and MI00153196. Resident #3 (R3) Review of R3's face sheet revealed admission to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including, cirrhosis (chronic liver damage), diabetes mellitus, hypertension (elevated blood pressure), hypothyroidism (not producing enough thyroid hormone), and Parkinson's disease (central nervous system disorder affecting movement). Review of complaint intake number MI00153136 submitted to the State Agency (SA), dated [DATE] revealed, R3 was admitted to (skilled nursing facility name) on [DATE] and discharged on [DATE]. Upon discharge from an acute care hospital, R3 was ordered to receive Carbidopa/Levodopa five times per day and Levothyroxine…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-03-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety as evidenced by: A. Failure to ensure expired food was discarded. B. Failure to ensure adequate labeling of potentially hazardous food. C. Failure to ensure cabinetry surrounding an ice machine was maintained in good repair. This deficient practice had the potential to result in food borne illness among any or all of the 89 residents in the facility. Findings include: The following were observed during the initial tour of the kitchen: 1. On 3/23/25 at 10:06 AM, undated heads of wilted cabbage were observed in a cardboard box in dry storage. An undated cardboard box of raw potatoes was observed next to the cabbage with numerous rotten potatoes scattered throughout the box. 2. On 03/23/25 at 10:07 AM, a broken raw egg was observed next to intact eggs inside a carton in the reach-in refrigerator. 3. On 3/23/25 at 10:08 AM, four pints of undated, moldy, cherry tomatoes were observed in the reach-in refrigerator. 4. On 3/23/25 at 10:10 AM, undated…
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 · F2025-03-26 · tag F0923 — widespreadHave enough outside ventilation via a window or mechanical ventilation, or both.
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 exhaust ventilation was functioning in resident bathrooms on one hall, serving 19 of a total 89 residents. This deficient practice resulted in noxious odors permeating the resident environment rendering the living conditions unpleasant and uncomfortable. Findings include: On 3/23/25 at 10:30 AM, noxious odors were noted throughout the 300 Hall. On 3/24/25 at 7:20 AM, noxious odors were noted throughout the 300 Hall. On 3/24/25 at 8:45 AM, in response to the presence of continued noxious odors on the 300 Hall, an investigation was initiated into determining the functioning of the exhaust ventilation system for resident bathrooms. The bathrooms serving the following rooms were inspected for functioning exhaust by placing a paper towel over the cling mounted duct cover and determining if there was adequate negative pressure to hold the paper in place. The failure to hold the towel in place was deemed a failure for that bathroom's exhaust system. This failure was noted in the bathrooms serving 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 · E2025-03-26 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake MI00150419. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were cared for in a dignified and respectful manner for five residents (#37, #51, #7, #38 and #2) of five residents reviewed for dignity, resulting in feelings of frustration, humiliation and low self-worth based on a reasonable person standard. Findings include: Resident #37 (R37) Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/10/2025, revealed R37 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including diabetes, colocutaneous fistula (abnormal tract leading from the intestine to an opening in the abdomen), history of MRSA (Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Areus) infection, and major depressive disorder. Further review revealed R37 was dependent (helper does all of the effort, resident does none of the effort to complete the activity) for ADLs (activities of daily living), including toileting hygiene, bathing and all mobility. A review of the 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 · E2025-03-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This deficient practice pertains to intake MI00151063. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADL) care for six dependent Residents (#35, #36, #42, #48, #65, and #81) out of 19 residents reviewed for personal hygiene and incontinence care. Findings include: Resident #35 (R35) Review of R35's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/12/24, revealed R35 required substantial/maximal assistance, indicating the helper completed more than half the effort and R35 was occasionally incontinent. R35 scored a 00 of 15 on the Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) assessment, reflective of severe impairment in cognition. On 3/23/25 at 11:56 AM, an observation was made of R35 in their room lying in bed. R35 reached out in an attempt for help. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) H was made aware of R35 needing assistance. CNA H was asked if R35 was incontinent and the last time they were checked on. CNA replied, Yes, I was in here around 8:00 AM this…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-03-26 · 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. Obtain physician orders and administer oxygen at the prescribed flow rate, and; 2. Ensure respiratory equipment was changed, labeled, stored, and cleaned appropriately; for eight Residents (#243, #43, #3, #240, #245, #88, #44, and #18) of eight residents reviewed for oxygen and respiratory equipment services. Findings include: Resident #243 (R243) On 3/23/25 at 11:51 AM, R243 was observed with supplemental oxygen being delivered via nasal cannula (tube that delivers supplemental oxygen). The oxygen tubing was dated 3/15/25. The oxygen was set to be administered at 3 LPM (liters per minute). R243 said the oxygen should be set at 2 LPM. During an interview with Family Member (FM) II on 3/23/25 at 11:55 AM, concern was verbalized regarding the oxygen required by R243. FM II said R243 should always be on oxygen, but the facility had repeatedly failed to ensure the portable oxygen tank was turned on. FM II stated the facility would also…
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 · E2025-03-26 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate below 5% for two Resident (#11 & #26) of nine residents reviewed for medication administration. This deficient practice resulted in 2 medication errors out of 31 opportunities for error with a medication error rate of 6.4%. Findings Include: Resident #11 (R11) R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis (a degenerative disease of the joints). Review of R11's physician orders revealed an order dated 10/13/24 that read: Tylenol 8 Hour Arthritis Pain Oral Tablet Extended Release 650 mg (milligrams): Give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for Arthritis pain. On 3/24/25 at 12:33 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) O was observed preparing medications to administer to R11. LPN O removed a tablet of Tylenol 8-Hour Arthritis Pain Extended Release and broke the tablet in half before placing both halves into a medication cup. LPN O was asked if extended-release tablets…
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 · E2025-03-26 · 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 dispose of expired medications and ensure required medications were dated when opened on two medication carts of three medication carts reviewed for medication storage and labeling. Findings include: Maple Lane medication cart: On 3/24/25 at 1:04 PM, the 200-unit (Maple Lane) medication cart was reviewed with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) O. The cart was noted to contain a Novolin R FlexPen (insulin). The FlexPen contained an illegible date. LPN O said the FlexPen was dated as opened on 2/16/25 and said the FlexPen needed to be disposed 30 days after opening. LPN O said the FlexPen was expired and disposed of the FlexPen in a biohazard container. A bottle of ciprofloxacin (antibiotic) eye drops in the medication cart was dated as opened 3/12/25. The box containing the bottle of ciprofloxacin eye drops contained a pharmacy-generated label indicating the medication was dispensed from pharmacy on 3/19/25. LPN O said, That doesn't make any sense - that's concerning. The medication cart contained a bottle 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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-03-26 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure meals were served at a palatable and appetizing temperature for two Residents (#51, #71) of two residents reviewed for food palatability, and nine out of 10 residents from the confidential group meeting, resulting in decreased meal satisfaction and the potential for decreased food acceptance and nutritional decline. Findings include: An observation of morning meal service in the [NAME] Unit dining room on 3/24/2025 revealed meals trays were delivered in an insulated cart from the main kitchen at 7:50 a.m. Temperatures taken from the first two trays off the cart revealed the following: pancakes temped at 106 degrees Fahrenheit (F); scrambled eggs temped at 102 degrees F. The last meal from the cart was observed to be delivered at 8:09 a.m. with the following temperatures taken: pancakes 98 degrees F; and oatmeal 128 degrees F. On 3/24/2025 at 7:55 a.m., Activities Aide (AA) EE was observed assisting with meal tray delivery in the [NAME] Unit dining…
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 · E2025-03-26 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to 1. Perform hand hygiene at appropriate opportunities for hand hygiene related to meal service and medication administration, 2. Appropriately don and doff disposable single use gloves, 3. Ensure contaminated ice was discarded. 4. Rinse and dry respiratory treatment equipment between medication treatments, 5. Maintain a sanitary medication cart, and 6. Ensure Infection Control Polices are update at least annually. Findings include: On 3/23/25 at 12:31 PM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) FF was observed in the 100-unit (Oak Lane) lounge preparing to deliver meal trays. After removing a meal tray from the meal cart and placing a can of soda pop on the tray, CNA FF walked toward a table in the lounge and inadvertently bumped into an open ice chest filled with ice. The can of soda pop fell from the meal tray into the open ice chest. CNA FF reached into the open ice chest with an ungloved, unwashed hand and removed the can of soda pop to place back on the meal tray. CNA FF placed the meal tray on a table in the lounge…
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 21 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-26 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
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 MI00151063. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a safe community discharge for one Resident (#76) of three residents reviewed for transfer and/or discharge. This deficient practice resulted in fear, distress, and feelings of helplessness regarding a safe discharge location. Findings include: Resident #76 (R76) Review of R76's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed initial admission to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including a below knee amputation of the right lower extremity and cerebral palsy (a neurological disorder that affects movement, posture, and balance). Review of R76's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/7/25, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicative of intact cognition. Review of a complaint received by the State Agency (SA) on 3/7/25 read, in part: [R76] has a right leg below the knee amputation and cerebral palsy on his whole left side. He is in a wheelchair . [R76] lives…
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 · D2025-03-26 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or resident representative in writing with the reason for a transfer out of the facility for two Residents (#6 and #51) of three residents reviewed for transfer and/or discharge. Findings include: Resident #6 (R6) Review of R6's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed initial admission to the facility on 9/8/22 with diagnoses including vascular dementia and acute kidney failure. Review of the facility census report revealed R6 was hospitalized from [DATE] - 11/26/24. Review of a progress note dated 11/19/24 at 13:13 [1:13 PM]: read, in part: .B/p [blood pressure] now 59/42, On call notified. Will send to ER [emergency room] for evaluation . Review of a facility document titled, Facility-Initiated Transfer for Nursing Homes, dated 11/19/24, did not indicate a date the resident and/or guardian was notified, and the document had no signature. On 3/26/25 at 9:41 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-26 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 written information was provided to two Residents/Representatives (#6 and #51) of three residents reviewed for written notification of bed hold. Findings include: Resident #6 (R6) Review of R6's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed initial admission to the facility on 9/8/22 with diagnoses including vascular dementia and acute kidney failure. Review of the facility census report revealed R6 was hospitalized from [DATE] - 11/26/24. Review of a progress note dated 11/19/24 at [1:13 PM]: read, in part: .B/p [blood pressure] now 59/42, On call notified. Will send to ER [emergency room] for evaluation . Review of a facility document titled, Bed Hold Authorization, uploaded in R6's EMR was left blank. On 3/25/25 at 2:21 PM, an interview was conducted with Business Office Manager (BOM) R who confirmed they were responsible for bed hold notifications. BOM R stated they were unsure why the blank Bed Hold Authorization form was uploaded to R6's EMR.…
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 · D2025-03-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan related to ostomy care for two Residents (#37 and #12) of two residents reviewed for comprehensive care planning, resulting in the potential for untimely, and unmet care needs. Findings include: Resident #37 (R37) Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/10/2025, revealed R37 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including colocutaneous fistula (abnormal tract leading from the intestine to an opening in the abdomen). Further review revealed R37 was dependent (helper does all of the effort, resident does none of the effort to complete the activity) for ADLs (activities of daily living), including toileting hygiene, bathing and all mobility. A review of the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment revealed a score of 13/15, indicating the Resident was cognitively intact. On 3/24/2025 at 7:40 a.m., R37 was observed seated in bed,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-26 · tag F0675 — failed to support quality of life — isolatedHonor each resident's preferences, choices, values and beliefs.
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 functional positioning during mealtimes for one Resident (#25) of two residents reviewed for positioning. Findings include: Resident #25 (R25) Review of R25's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed initial admission to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), Parkinson's disease, and above knee amputation of the left lower extremity. Review of R25's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/14/25, revealed a score of 15, indicative of intact cognition. On 3/23/25 at 11:59 AM, R25 was observed in the main dining room during the lunch time meal, sitting in a wheelchair angled away from the dining table with a plate resting between his chest and abdomen, eating a sandwich. R25 stated he was forced to eat off his abdomen because he was unable to reach his plate when placed on the table due to the positioning of his wheelchair. On 3/23/25 at 1:26 PM, R25 was interviewed…
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 · D2025-03-26 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement interventions and prevent the development of a pressure ulcer for one Resident (#42) of five residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Findings include: Resident #42 (R42) Review of R42's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/15/25, revealed admission to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including: hypertension, type two diabetes mellitus, and amputation below the knee of the right leg. R42 scored an 8 of 15 on the Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) assessment, reflective of moderately impaired cognition. Review of R42's Braden scale for predicting pressure sore risk assessment, dated 11/11/24, revealed a score of 14, indicating a moderate risk for developing pressure sores. Review of R42's Skin and Wound Evaluation, dated 2/3/25, revealed R42 had developed a facility acquired, unstageable pressure sore on their left Achilles (heel area), which measured 0.5 centimeters (cm) x 1.0 cm. Review of R42'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 · Dcited before2025-03-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure smoking paraphernalia was stored in a secure location for one Resident (#25) of three residents reviewed for accidents, hazards, and supervision. Findings include: Resident #25 (R25) Review of R25's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed initial admission to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), nicotine dependence, and chronic respiratory failure. Review of R25's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/14/25, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15, indicative of intact cognition. On 3/23/25 at 1:26 PM, an interview was conducted with R25 who verbalized frustration he must mobilize off-campus premises to smoke cigarettes. R25 was observed removing a pack of cigarettes and a lighter from his jacket pocket. An oxygen concentrator was observed in the room which R25 who verified he utilized supplemental oxygen at night. Review of R25'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 · D2025-03-26 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective vaccination program for three residents (R28, R42, and R48) of five residents reviewed for vaccinations. Findings include: On 3/24/24 at 4:15 PM, a record review was completed for the following residents regarding immunizations: Resident #28 (R28) Review of the electronic medical record (EMR) for R28, revealed his guardian had signed a consent for pneumococcal vaccination on 9/27/24. Review of R28's EMR and state immunization report revealed that he never received the vaccination booster. R28 was noted to be over [AGE] years of age. Resident #42 (R42) Review of the EMR for R42 revealed his guardian had signed a consent for pneumococcal vaccination on 10/20/24. Review of R42's EMR and state immunization report revealed that he never received the vaccination booster. R42 was noted to be over [AGE] years of age. Resident #48 (R48) Review of the EMR for R48, revealed her guardian had signed a consent for pneumococcal vaccination 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 · D2025-03-26 · tag F0948 — isolatedEnsure that paid feeding assistants have the training they need.
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 train a non-licensed employee with the State-approved training course for feeding assistance to residents. This deficient practice resulted in an increased risk of feeding complications for all 3 residents requiring assistance during mealtimes. Findings include: During the breakfast observation in the 300 Hall dining room on 3/25/25 at 7:40 AM, Activities Aide B was observed feeding Resident #60 (R60) a level 3 advanced mechanical soft diet. When asked why she was feeding R60, Activities Aide B said assistance was needed as other staff were not available. On 3/25/25 at 8:00 AM, an interview was conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Director of Nursing (DON) in the NHAs office. Both the NHA and the DON were asked if activities aides were allowed to provide feeding assistance for residents. The DON replied, Only if they are Certified Nurse Aides. The employee file was requested for Activities Aide B. The NHA confirmed that the facility does not have any paid feeding assistance. 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.
- Potential for harm · F2024-04-17 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition services. Findings include: On 4/15/24 at 9:55 a.m., an interview was conducted with Dietary [NAME] (Staff) H about her certification as a dietary manager. Staff H stated she had not completed the Certified Dietary Manager's (CDM) course work and believed that Dietary [NAME] (Staff) I had more interest in becoming the CDM for the facility. Staff H stated that a CDM from another facility was helping them with keeping track of weights of residents. On 4/16/24 at 11:30 a.m., Staff I was noted to be serving the main dining room lunch which was tacos, refried beans, mixed vegetables, ham and potato casserole, mashed potatoes, and gravy. It was observed that the tacos were pre-made in the soft shell and Staff I could not bring the tacos up to temperature of 135 degrees Fahrenheit. Staff I was observed taking a taco out of the steam table, placing it on a used heating pad and placing the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-17 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 written information was provided to five Resident/Representatives (#3, #5, #76, #332, #333) of six reviewed for written notice of bed hold. Findings include: Resident #3 (R3) Review of R3's progress notes revealed the following: 1/26/24 at 19:21 (7:21PM): .spoke with resident again about change in condition and possibly going to the hospital. Resident is having pain radiating across upper back . Resident agreed to go to hospital. 1/26/24 at 19:45 (7:45PM): On call [provider] ordered hospital transfer d/t (due to) change in condition .resident left with EMS (Emergency Medical Services) at 1937 (7:37PM) . Review of the Clinical Census report revealed R3 was hospitalized from [DATE] through 1/29/24. Review of the Bed Hold Authorization form revealed the Resident/Responsible Party signature line read, per call w/ (with) [name of Resident's son]. No signature from the resident or resident representative was noted on the form. Resident #76 (R76)…
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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0661 — isolatedEnsure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
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 a recapitulation of stay was completed for one Resident (#10) out of two closed records reviewed for discharge documentation. Findings Include: Resident #10 (R10) Review of R10's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 2/1/24, revealed admission to the facility on 7/27/23, with diagnoses including bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, suicidal ideations, and post-polio syndrome (a condition that causes gradual muscle weakness and muscle loss). R10 was discharged from the facility on 3/28/24. Review of R10's EMR revealed no discharge plan or recapitulation of stay. On 4/17/24 at 9:39AM, an interview was conducted with Social Service Director G who confirmed no post-discharge summary or recapitulation of stay was completed because R10 discharged to a different skilled nursing facility. Social Service Director G stated that when a resident transfers to the same level of care, a recapitulation of stay is not needed. On 4/17/24 at 10:40AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON).…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-05-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper cleaning of areas with potential direct food exposure. These conditions resulted in an increased risk for contaminated foods and spread of infection affecting all residents that consumed food from the kitchen. Findings include: During the initial tour of the kitchen with Dietary Aide (Staff H) on 5/23/23 at 10:29 AM, the hood over the cooking equipment providing the ventilation was noted to have a thick grease build up on the lip of the hood. The spickets providing the means for fire suppression were observed to have dust adhering to them. The spickets and the hood were directly over the stove used to cook resident food in open pots. During further kitchen observation on 5/24/23 at 7:45 AM, the Interim Dietary Supervisor (Staff I) also observed the equipment hood which remained greasy and was caked with thick layer of dust particles embedded in the grease. Staff I stated this piece of equipment had recently been cleaned by an outside company on 5/17/23 as was documented on a sticker adhered to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-05-26 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
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 follow through with the grievance process with regards to lost personal items as expressed by six residents attending a confidential group meeting as well as one Resident (R11) when interviewed during the survey. This deficient practice resulted in dissatisfaction and frustration with care of resident property. Findings include: On 05/24/23 at 11:00 AM, six residents met in a confidential group meeting to express their concerns. During this confidential group meeting, the residents expressed they often brought concerns up during monthly Resident Council meetings but said their concerns were not always acted upon especially missing personal items. The residents felt frustrated. One resident (C1) stated she had a missing skirt as well as missing pajama pants. Another resident (C2) stated she was missing eyeglasses. C1 also stated she was missing partial dentures as she opened her mouth to show a space of missing teeth. The residents stated, We tell them but do not always get an answer. During a visit on 5/23/23…
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 · E2023-05-26 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
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 follow the specific portion sizes indicated on the prepared menus, and four of six residents in a confidential group interview voiced dissatisfaction with meal portion sizes which were too small. This deficient practice resulted in residents experiencing frustration and hunger and the potential to result in meals which fail to meet resident nutritional needs for those residents receiving meals prepared in the dietary department. Findings include: On 05/24/23 at 11:00 AM, six residents met in a confidential group meeting to express their concerns. During this confidential group meeting, the residents stated they often brought food concerns to the monthly Resident Council meetings but said their concerns were not always acted upon. The residents felt frustrated. One Resident (C1) stated, Half the time you don't get what you want. Another Resident (C3) said, You don't get enough food. C3 gave an example stating when chicken was served I just got two little bites. Minutes of the Resident Council Meetings 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 · D2023-05-26 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide timely notices of medical coverage ending for two Residents (#171 & #173) of three residents reviewed for advance beneficiary notices (ABNs). This deficient practice resulted in residents having a limited window for opportunity for appeal for a loss in medical coverage for rehabilitation stays. Findings include: On 5/24/23 at 5:00 p.m., the advance beneficiary notice task was completed. The ABN notice for Resident #173 stated services would end on 4/6/23. The ABN form was signed by Resident #173 on 4/5/23. A review of the diagnosis Resident #173 was admitted for a hip fracture on 3/27/23 and discharged on 4/7/23. The ABN notice for Resident #171 stated services would end on 2/16/23. The ABN form was signed by Resident #171 on 2/15/23. A review of the diagnosis listing revealed Resident #171 was admitted for urinary retention on 2/1/23 and discharged on 2/17/23. During an interview on 5/25/23 at 10:00 a.m., the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated there should have been notes on the second page of the ABN…
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 · D2023-05-26 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation for an injury due to a improper transfer or one Resident (#58) of three residents reviewed for falls with injury. This deficient practice resulted in the potential for undetected abuse and/or neglect and the potential for unmet care needs: Findings include: Review of R58's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed she admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, stiffness of left hand, and anxiety disorder. Review of her 3/21/23 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed she required extensive two person assist for bed mobility. R58's care plan revealed she required a hoyer lift for transfers. The facility investigation report, dated 5/17/23, revealed, HOM CENA (Hospice Certified Nurse Aide) reported to this nurse that she had the hoyer lift tip onto resident and themselves during a transfer from bed to shower chair. Upon examining resident she was noted to have skin tear to bilateral elbows.…
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 before2023-05-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Resident 30 (R30) A review of the EMR face sheet for R30, dated 5/25/23 revealed admission to the facility on 3/21/2017 with diagnoses including Cerebral Palsy (a group of disorders that affect a person's ability to move and maintain balance and posture), major depressive disorder, and mild intellectual disabilities. The EMR revealed R30 had a fall on 5/16/23 at 2:00 PM. The Accident and Incident Report revealed R30 was being transferred by CNA from w/c (wheelchair) to recliner . as resident knees buckled and was lower (sic) to the floor . Immediate action taken: .use gait belt for transfers. The Post Fall Evaluation revealed: 10. Gait Assist devices at time of fall: Has device but was not in use. Action Taken: Encourage staff to toilet prior to return to room after meals. Use gait belt for transfers. The Care Plan for R30 was reviewed and included a focus which indicated: (R30) has an ADL (Activities of Daily Living) Self Care Performance Deficit and requires assistance with ADL's and mobility r/t (related to)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure timely and appropriate dementia care services were provided for three Residents (#52, #53 & #67) of five residents reviewed for dementia care. This deficient practice resulted in the potential for unmet needs related to dementia care, including but not limited to, undetected extrapyramidal symptoms, increased behaviors, stress, anger, depression, and feelings of being lost. Findings include: Resident #52 (R52) A review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) face sheet for R52, dated 5/26/23 revealed admission to the facility on 7/21/21 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, major depression, and traumatic brain injury. A review of the EMR care plan for R52, neurological status, read in part: . Assess for effects of psychotropic meds (medications); dystonia, akathisia, akinesia, rigidity, tremors, etc. Report to MD (Medical Director) as indicated. Date Initiated: 07/22/21 . Observe and report to MD prn (as needed) 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
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 assure residents received food as prescribed by a physician and in accordance with the plan of care in two of five residents reviewed for therapeutic diets (Resident #30 and Resident #33). This deficient practice resulted in a potential for choking and the potential for health complications. Findings include: Resident # 33 (R33) A review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) face sheet for R33, dated 5/25/23 revealed admission to the facility on 8/4/22 with diagnoses including chronic end stage kidney disease, high blood pressure, and dependence on renal dialysis. The physician's orders printed on 5/23/23 indicated a diet of 2 gm (gram) Na (Sodium) diet, Regular texture, Thin consistency. Puree meat only. Large Portions and NO rice per request, 1800 ml (milliliters) fluid restriction x 24 hours per renal RD (Registered Dietitian) recommendations. The most recent RD note dated 5/12/23 read in part, .Resident continues to receive a Regular, chopped meat, 2gm Na diet with large meal portions as well as 1.8L…
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 · D2023-05-26 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adaptive equipment during meal service for one resident (R41) of one resident reviewed for adaptive equipment use. This deficient practice resulted in increased difficulty with nutritional consumption and had the potential for decreased fluid intake and dehydration. Findings include: A review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) face sheet for R41, dated 5/25/23 revealed admission to the facility on 7/7/22 with diagnoses including major depressive disorder, high blood pressure, partial intestinal obstruction, and diabetes. The care plan for R41 included a focus of alteration in nutritional and/or hydration status dated as initiated on 5/10/22. This focus included an intervention of Adaptive Equipment: Blue mugs w/lids for all beverages dated as initiated on 5/18/22. During the lunch meal service on 5/23/23 at 12:17 PM, R41 was observed in her room eating her meal unassisted. Her tray card indicated she needed adaptive equipment: Blue Handle Mug. She had a blue handled mug on her bedside table with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$39,000 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $39,000 — penalty dated 2025-03-26
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 | 1 of 5 | 2.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.5 | -1.5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KHAN, ANIS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/1999 |
| QAZI, MOHAMMAD | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/1999 |
| CIENA HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/24/2025 |
| FREDERICK, PATRICK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/2019 |
| GEDEON, BRIAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/1999 |
| MOHAMMAD A QAZI LIVING TRUST DATED 09/26/97 | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/1999 |
| DEUTSCH, NEAL | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2009 |
| GARDINA, ANNA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2009 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 8 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 $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MI
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Michigan Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 235438. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-26, 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.