The Laurels of Mt. Pleasant

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

42.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 88 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 41.9% 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 62 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 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 34% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 86.9 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 13 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 3.70 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.86 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.24 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 3.26 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.88 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.00 to 0.52 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 22% 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

• Potential for harm · D2026-05-05 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake #2680498. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to manage catheters according to physician's orders for two residents (R102 and R103) of 3 residents reviewed for catheter care. Findings include:R102 Review of an admission Record revealed R102 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included traumatic brain injury and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Review of a current suprapubic catheter Care Plan need for R102, created 8/8/2023, directed facility staff to change R102's suprapubic catheter every 30 days. Review of R102's hospice care plan, dated 6/26/2025, revealed .replace the catheter and drainage system (every) 30 days and upon evidence of disconnection, leakage, or (signs/symptoms) infection . In a telephone interview on 5/4/2026 at 11:10 AM, Family Member of R102 I reported R102 discharged from the facility to a hospice facility on 11/13/2025. Family Member I reported the hospice facility was having a hard time changing…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-05 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an accurate Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for 2 residents (R100 and R102) of 7 residents reviewed for accuracy of medical records. Findings include:R100 Review of an admission Record revealed R100 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included cellulitis (bacterial skin infection) of the back, sepsis (a body's extreme response to an infection), chronic kidney disease, and adult failure to thrive. Review of R100's Progress Notes, dated 3/18/2026 at 12:47 PM revealed .resident (with) significant weight loss.resident declining in health and refusing meals at times and wanting to stay in bed most of the time.NP (Nurse Practitioner) aware and so is dietician to initiate interventions. During an interview on 5/5/2026 at 9:36 AM, Unit Manager (UM) G reported that she had written the progress note on 3/18/2026 at 12:47 PM and had notified R100's family member about the change in condition but did not document 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-06-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care to dependent residents for three residents (R49, R30, and R81) of four residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. Findings: R49 Review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed R49 was admitted to the facility 5/19/2023 with pertinent diagnoses that included generalized weakness and medically complex conditions. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) (a tool used for assessing a resident's care needs) dated 5/21/2025 reflected Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) (a scale used to determine a resident's cognitive status) score of 13 out of 15 which indicated R49 was cognitively intact. The MDS Section GG on functional abilities reflected R49 could eat if staff set up the meal and was dependent on staff to roll the Resident in bed. The MDS reflected R49 was incontinent of bowel and bladder. On 6/24/25 at 12:38 AM the room of R49 was observed to be the last room on the hall and was around the corner making it 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-26 · tag F0552 — isolated
  Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
  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 inform the resident of the risks and benefits of a new psychotropic medication prior to initiation for 1 resident (R51) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed R51 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included anxiety disorder and major depressive disorder. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) (a tool used for assessing a resident's care needs) assessment for R51, with a reference date of 4/23/2025 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) (a scale used to determine a resident's cognitive status) score of 15, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated R51 was cognitively intact. Review of R51's Social Services Note, dated 3/28/2025 at 4:21 PM, revealed the medical provider reviewed a recommendation from the mental health nurse practitioner for R51 to begin taking Pristiq (a psychotropic medication used to treat major depressive…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-26 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  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 access, monitor and identify significant weight loss for 1 resident (R79) out of 18 residents reviewed for weight loss. Review of policy Weight Management last revised 9/22/23 revealed, Policy: Residents will be monitored for significant weight changes on a regular basis. Residents are expected to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as unusual body weight and protein levels; . Further review of the Weight Management policy revealed, The Dietary Manager/RD and DON are responsible for coordination of an interdisciplinary approach to managing the processes for prediction, prevention, treatment, monitoring and calculation of unintended weight loss/gain. Review of Practice Guidelines reflects, .5. Residents determined to be at risk or have significant weight changes will be weighed on a weekly basis. Residents at risk are: . e. All new admits/re-admits for 4 weeks, f. Residents with insidious weight loss and; 5% in one…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-07-24 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — pattern
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were left within reach for 3 residents (Resident #5, #8, and #68) of 3 residents reviewed for availability of call lights, resulting in the potential for unmet care needs and the potential for residents to not meet their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well being. Finding include: Resident #5 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #5 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included memory deficit and dementia. Review of a current fall Care Plan intervention for Resident #5, initiated 5/2/2019, directed staff to place the resident's call light in reach and encourage her to use it for assistance as needed. In an observation and interview on 7/23/2024 at 8:51 AM in Resident #5's room, Resident #5's call light was clipped to the bed sheet under the edge of her pillow and not visible to the resident. When asked if she knew where her call light was located, Resident #5…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-07-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to: 1) ensure proper use of Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), 2) ensure proper use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), and 3) ensure proper sanitizing of shared medical equipment for 2 residents (Resident #12 and #5) of 3 residents reviewed for Transmission Based Precautions (TBP), resulting in the increased potential for cross-contamination, bacterial harborage and spread of infection to the entire 400 hallway. Findings include: Resident #12 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #12 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included paralysis following a stroke, tracheostomy, and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Review of a current respiratory Care Plan need for Resident #12, revised 4/2/2024, revealed .Enhanced barrier precautions dcd d/t (discontinued due to) psychosocial detriment resident expressed . Review of Resident #12's Physician's Orders, active 7/22/2024, revealed no order for…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-07-24 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Mental Illness/Intellectual Disability/Related Condition Exemption Criteria Certification Level II Screening (DCH-3878) was completed for 1 resident (Resident #43) of 1 resident reviewed for PASARR assessments, resulting in the potential for unmet mental health needs. Findings include: Resident #43 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #43 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included dementia, bipolar disorder, depression, and anxiety. Review of Resident #43's Annual Resident Review (ARR), form (DCH-3877), dated 2/20/2024, revealed section II was checked yes for lines 1, 2, 3, and 4 related to diagnoses of anxiety disorder, mood disorder, bipolar disorder, depression, and dementia and prescriptions for Depakote and Zyprexa. Further review of DCH-3877 revealed .If any answer to items 1-6 in SECTION II is Yes, send ONE copy to the local Community Mental Health Services Program . with a copy of form…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% 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