WellBridge of Pinckney
664 South Howell Street, Pinckney, MI 48169 · For profit - Corporation · 100 certified beds · (734) 954-6700 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 3 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (22) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- 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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 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 | 9.4% | 10.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.8% | 5.4% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.7% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 4.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.5% | 3.0% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.0% | 12.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.6% | 19.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.4% | 5.1% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 5.2% | 20.0% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.0% | 14.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.1% | 1.1% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 83.7% | 79.5% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.3% | 24.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.6% | 11.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.31 | 1.84 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.41 | 1.64 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ 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.
62.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 256 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 65.3% 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 95 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 0.47 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 78% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 32% 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 | 62.6%CMS range 56.2–66.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.0%CMS range 8.5–14.7 | 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 | 65.3% | 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 | 66.3% | 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 | 61.0% | 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 | 98.5% | 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 | 97.9% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 0.8% | 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 | 5.9%CMS range 3.6–9.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.81 | 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 100 beds and averages 90.4 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 10 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 3.76 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.23 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 3.39 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.90 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.60 to 0.23 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
22 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-12-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake #2691527Based on interview and record review the facility failed to prevent an avoidable fall as well as conduct a thorough root-cause analysis investigation into a fall for one resident (R801), of three residents reviewed for falls resulting in fractures of their clavicle and thoracic vertebra number four. Findings include:A complaint received by the State Agency alleged R801's bed was not in the lowest position when they sustained a fall resulting in injury.On [DATE] at 10:22 AM, a review of R801's closed clinical record revealed they admitted to the facility on [DATE], elected Hospice Services on [DATE] and expired in the facility on [DATE]. R801's diagnoses included: repeated falls, stroke, heart disease, vascular dementia with behaviors, and adjustment disorder.Continued review of R801's record revealed an Incident Note entered into the record on [DATE] at 12:04 PM by Nurse 'A' that read, Writer was notified that resident had fallen on the floor. When writer went to assess…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-07-09 · 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
This citation pertains to Intake#1201757.Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to prevent a fall for one (R701) of three residents reviewed for falls, resulting in R701 falling out of bed and sustaining multiple fractures, bruising to their face, eyes, arms and legs that required hospitalization. Findings include: A complaint was filed with the State Agency (SA) that alleged during care R701, who was bedridden, was turned too far to the right and fell out of bed, landed face down resulting in fractures to their nose, right ankle and multiple bruising on their face, arms, legs requiring hospitalization.On 7/9/25 at approximately 8:50AM, R701 was observed lying in bed. The bed was in a high position and did not have enablers bars. The resident had bruising under both the left and right eye. Their left arm was bruised from their wrist up to above their elbow. R701 was queried as to what caused the bruises. R701 reported that a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was changing their brief and asked them to turn over to the right and hold the mattress 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.
- Actual harm · G2023-12-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake #MI00141606. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to identify a change in condition and ensure timely care and treatment for one resident (R705) of one resident reviewed for a change in condition, resulting in delayed hospitalization and treatment, and the worsening of overall health. Findings include: A review of a complaint submitted to State Agency(SA) documented concerns of failure to assess and properly treat, lack of rehabilitation, fall with injury and notify a change in condition. On 12/27/23 at 9:30 AM, Family A(the complainant) was interviewed regarding R705's stay at the facility. Family A stated, .On 10/18/23 my mother was transferred to the facility and as soon as she was released from the stretcher her independence was stripped away. My mother was placed in her room they took vital signs and put her in a brief. My mother and I both told the facility that she did not wear briefs because she was able to walk to the bathroom, and that when 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 · E2025-07-09 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 #1201662.Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate documentation of administration and accountability of controlled substances for one (R702) of one resident reviewed for medication administration. Findings include:Review of a complaint reported to the State Agency included an allegation the facility failed to prescribe controlled substances according to standards of practice.Clinical record review revealed R702 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] for physical therapy and back pain management related to a compression fracture to the lumbar spine (lower back). Record review did not reveal a calculated Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score, however Provider Progress notes documented R702 was alert, orientated, and able to make their needs known.Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) and the corresponding Control Substance Proof of Use Records (CS) revealed multiple discrepancies in which Oxycodone (an opioid pain…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the implementation of accurate assessments, appropriate and effective care plans/interventions and adequate supervision for the safety of R89 (elopement) and R's 69, 3 and 16 (falls), five of seven residents reviewed for accidents. Findings include: R89 On 4/1/25 at 11:30 AM, R89 was observed sitting in their wheelchair in the dining area with their daughter. A brief interview was conducted with the resident and the resident's daughter at that time. R89's daughter stated they had no concerns with the care provided at the facility. R89's daughter stated the facility staff has kept them and their siblings informed of everything, . like the other day he (R89) was found in the parking lot thinking he was going home . R89's daughter stated the staff called them and because of the incident an ankle bracelet was placed on the resident. A review of the medical record revealed R89 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-03 · tag F0712 — patternEnsure that the resident and his/her doctor meet face-to-face at all required visits.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY R#34 On 4/1/24 at approximately 9:51 AM, R34 was observed lying in bed. The resident was alert and able to answer all questions asked. R34 reported that they had been a resident at the facility for about two years. When asked about the care provided at the facility, R34 responded that while most of the staff are very nice and most care is provided, they were upset that they are never seen by their doctor. R34 noted that they reported their concern to some of the staff members but could not specifically recall their names. A review of R34's clinical record revealed the resident was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: type II diabetes, COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and rheumatoid arthritis. A review of the resident's MDS noted that R34 had a BIMS score of 14/15 (cognitively intact cognition). The last physician notes in R34's chart was dated 1/24/25 (late entry) and authored by Physician D. Prior to the visit on 1/24/25, R34 was seen by Physician D as seen on a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-03 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure 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 observation, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to prevent a significant medication error for one (R67) of one resident reviewed for a significant medication error. Findings include: On 4/1/25 at 11:07 AM, R67 was observed sleeping in bed. R67's wife was at the bedside. When asked if they had any concerns with R67's care at the facility R67's wife stated there was a problem with the resident's Lasix medication when they were first admitted . R67's wife stated R67 had congestive heart failure in the hospital and was prescribed Lasix medication. R67's wife said the nurses was not giving the medication to R67 and they had questioned the nurses about it and they did not listen until they informed the facility's Director of Nursing (DON) of the issue. R67's wife stated the DON did fix their concern but R67's wife stated .What if I wasn't here? I am always by his side because I don't know what could happen . A review of the medical record revealed R67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-03 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a physician's order, assessment and specify the times to be used while in wheelchair for a seatbelt device per plan of care for one (R7) resident reviewed for physical restraints. Findings include: On 4/1/25 at 10:00 AM, R7 was observed in their room sitting in wheelchair positioned in a slouched manner over a bedside table. R7 was also observed with a seatbelt device on and clasped together. R7 was asked how they were doing but the conversation was intangible. A review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed R7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of falls, difficulty in walking and cerebral palsy. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed on 12/27/24 indicated R7 had severe cognitive impairment with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of 7/15. On 4/2/25 at 11:00 AM, the assigned Nurse was asked if R7 could release the seatbelt device by themselves. The nurse attempted asking several…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-03 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to timely report an allegation of an elopement to the State Agency (SA), for one Resident (R89) of one resident reviewed for elopements. Findings include: On 4/1/25 at 11:30 AM, R89 was observed sitting in their wheelchair in the dining area with their daughter. A brief interview was conducted with the resident and the resident's daughter at that time. R89's daughter stated they had no concerns with the care provided at the facility. R89's daughter stated the facility staff has kept them and their siblings informed of everything, . like the other day he (R89) was found in the parking lot thinking he was going home . R89's daughter stated the staff called them and stated because of the incident an ankle bracelet was placed on the resident. A review of the medical record revealed R89 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia. The medical record revealed R89 was deemed unable to make medical treatment decisions…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-03 · 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 observation, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an elopement incident for one Resident of one resident reviewed for elopements. Findings include: On 4/1/25 at 11:30 AM, R89 was observed sitting in their wheelchair in the dining area with their daughter. A brief interview was conducted with the resident and the resident's daughter at that time. R89's daughter stated they had no concerns with the care provided at the facility. R89's daughter stated the facility staff keep them and their siblings informed of everything, . like the other day he (R89) was found in the parking lot thinking he was going home . R89's daughter stated the staff called them and because of the incident an ankle bracelet was placed on the resident. A review of the medical record revealed R89 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia. The medical record revealed the resident was deemed unable to make medical treatment decisions and had an activated power 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 · Dcited before2025-04-03 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to administer medication according to professional standards of practice for one Resident (R12) of one resident reviewed for medications. Findings include: On 4/1/25 at approximately 10:03 AM, R12 was observed sitting in their wheelchair watching television. The resident had a full breakfast tray in front of them. On the tray was a small cup filled with approximately 10 pills. The resident was asked about the pills sitting on the breakfast tray. While alert, R12 was not able to provide an answer as to what pills were in the cup and why they were left on their tray. On 4/1/25 at approximately 10:11 AM, Nurse E who was assigned to R12, was asked about the pills left on R12's breakfast tray. Nurse 'E entered the room and viewed the pills and noted they thought the resident took the medication and then noted they should not have left the pills on the tray. Nurse E lifted the cup and asked R12 to take the medication. Nurse E did not provide 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 · D2025-04-03 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review facility failed to ensure an indwelling foley catheter was secured appropriately for one Resident (R3) of two residents reviewed for catheter care resulting in the potential for catheter dislodgement, urethral trauma, and Urinary Tract Infection (UTI). Findings include: R3 A review of the medical record for R3 revealed admission to the facility on 9/27/22 with diagnoses including urinary retention, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, and dementia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed R3 had Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14/15, indicative of intact cognition. On 4/1/25 at approximately 9:05 AM, R3 was observed in their bed and a foley catheter collection bag was connected to the wheelchair. A velcro catheter securement device was observed laying on the floor of the bathroom on the right side of the toilet. During this observation an interview was completed. When asked how long the catheter was place, R3 reported they…
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 · D2024-07-17 · 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 MI00145465, MI00145510 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to permit one resident (R901) of two reviewed for discharge, to return to the facility and failed to provide the required facility-initiated discharge documentation. Findings include: On 7/3/24 and 7/8/24 two complaints were received by the State Agency (SA) alleging the facility failed to readmit R901 once medically cleared from the hospital and did not provide facility-initiated discharge paperwork. A clinical record review revealed R901 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses which included history of traumatic brain injury, hypertension, asthma, dysphagia (difficulty speaking and swallowing) and seizures. R901 required maximum assistance for all Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and had mass cognitive and communication loss related to the traumatic brain injury. Review of a Medical Progress note dated 7/1/24 documented the Facility Physician, Doctor (Dr.) A was notified…
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 9 citations
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to establish a comprehensive infection control program that identified resident infections, utilized laboratory and pharmaceutical data and ensured departmental surveillance and staff education on infection control. This deficient practice had the potential to effect all 75 residents (including R61 and R286) who resided in the facility. Findings include: On 3/13/24 at 10:11 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) C, who served as the Infection Preventionist was interviewed and asked about the facility' s infection surveillance. RN C explained she had started at the facility in late January 2024, so February was the first month she had personally done surveillance at the facility. RN C was asked if she also provided education to staff. RN C explained she was going to start doing staff development as she had noticed several issues with staff education. During the review of the infection surveillance, it was discovered R61, who had been admitted multiple times 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-13 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 abide to the resident's advance directives for one (R42) of one resident revieweded for code status. Finding include: R42 was initially admitted to this facility on [DATE] with obstructive uropathy (blockage of urine flow), diabetes, colon cancer, chronic kidney disease, behavioral disturbance and unspecified dementia. A Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) summary score of five, indicated a severely impaired cognition. On [DATE] at 1:30 PM, a record review revealed R42 consented on [DATE] .in the event my heart and breathing should stop, no person shall attempt to resuscitate. Being of sound mind, I voluntarily execute this order, and I understand its full import . The do-not-resuscitate order was issued by Physician G and the attestation of witnesses signed by Social Service Department B and J stated .The individual who has executed this order appears to be of sound mind, and under no duress, fraud, or undue influence . Further record review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-13 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to secure medications and administer medications/treatments according to accepted standards of clinical practice for three residents (R63, R56, R6) of three reviewed for standards of practice, resulting in the potential of medications not being administered correctly and for medications to be unsecured. Findings include: Resident #6 Clinical record review revealed R6 was admitted to this facility on 7/17/22 with primary medical diagnosis of nontraumatic brain dysfunction, heart failure, thyroid disease, and urinary dysfunction. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) summary score of nine, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. On 3/12/24 at 8:26 AM, medication administration was observed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A for R6. Prepackaged medications were handed to this surveyor for identification. As LPN A was retrieving additional ordered medications, it was identified…
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 · D2024-03-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure nail care was provided to a resident (R10) of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's). Findings include: On 3/11/24 at 10:42 AM, R10 was observed lying in bed. R10 was asked about care at the facility. R10 explained they had been asking for their fingernails and toenails to be cut, but no one had cut them since they had been there. Observation of R10's toenails revealed long, broken toenails. R10 explained they had been told they were on an imaginary list to be seen by Podiatry. Observation of R10's fingernails revealed broken nails on R10's right hand and long (approximately 1/4 to 1/2 inch) fingernails on R10's left hand including R10's left thumbnail that was wrapped over the top of the thumb and going down the inside of the thumb. R10 explained they did not have use of their left arm, only their right arm so their nails would get broken on their right hand as they used it for everything. Review of 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 · D2024-03-13 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective Antibiotic Stewardship program that included consistent implementation of protocols for appropriate antibiotic administration and ensured that infection criteria were met for three residents (R47, R61 and R286) resulting in the potential for unnecessary antibiotic usage and the development of multiple drug resistant organisms. Findings include: On 3/12/24 at 10:11 AM, Review of the facility's infection control program with Registered Nurse (RN) C, who served as the Infection Control Nurse revealed the following: R61 was documented in February 2024 as having a urinary tract infection (UTI), was Asymptomatic, no organism was identified, and was on indefinite Macrobid 100 mg (milligrams) one time a day since 6/15/23. R61 was also documented in December 2023 as having a UTI for Functional decline, the organism was documented as UNKNOWN, criteria not met, was on Macrobid 100 mg. RN C explained R61 had been placed on Macrobid by an Infectious Disease (ID) doctor and had been on Macrobid since 6/15/23. RN C…
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 before2023-12-27 · 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 interview and record, the facility failed to transfer one resident (R705) per the care plan, of one resident reviewed for falling, resulting in a fall with injury to the back of head. Findings include: A review of a complaint submitted to the State Agency(SA) documented concerns of failure to assess and properly treat, lack of rehabilitation, fall with injury and notify a change in condition. A record review revealed that R705 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of displaced intertrochanteric facture of the left femur, weakness and dizziness and giddiness with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMs) score of 14 (indicating an intact cognition). A further review of the record revealed that on 10/18/23, an admission note was put in stating that Resident states she's had multiple falls in the past month. A further review of the record revealed that upon admission on [DATE], R705's transfer status was a two persons assist with a two wheeled walker and weight bearing as tolerated and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-09-28 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide 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
This citation pertains to intake #'s MI00135571, MI00135911, MI00137740, MI00139155, and MI00139206. Multiple complaints were received by the State Agency that alleged the facility did not have adequate staffing to meet resident care needs. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate staffing levels to meet resident needs for four residents (R#'s 905, and 906) of five residents reviewed for staffing, resulting in multiple complaints of frustration and unmet resident care needs. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 90 residents in the facility. Findings include: An abbreviated survey was conducted on 9/27/23 and 9/28/23. During the survey, multiple in-person and telephone interviews were conducted with residents, resident's family, and staff (who all wished to remain anonymous) regarding staffing levels in the building. The following was reported: A resident reported certified nursing aides (CNA's) have to go to the dining room during meal times to help prepare drinks, pass meal trays, set-up meal trays, and clean up meal trays. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake #'s MI00135571, MI00135911, and MI00137740. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure wound care treatments were initiated upon admission and treatments were completed per physician's orders for one resident (R901) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Findings include: On 9/27/23 at 10:48 AM, a review of R901's closed clinical record was conducted and revealed they admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: rhabdomyolysis (damaged muscle tissue release proteins and electrolytes into the bloodstream), high blood pressure, atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat) and diabetes. R901's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated R901 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance from one staff member for transferring, bed mobility, dressing, and bathing. Continued review of R901's closed clinical record revealed a wound care progress note dated 3/23/23 that indicated R901 admitted to the facility 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.
- No harm found · C2023-09-28 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
This citation pertains to intake #'s MI00135571, MI00135911, MI00137740, MI00139155, and MI00139206. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to display current and accurate nurse staffing information for all 90 residents as well as visitors in the facility, resulting in verbalized complaints of the facility's staffing levels. Findings include: On 9/28/23 at 12:00 PM, a family member reported the facility had not been posting the facility's daily staffing numbers in the book at the front lobby. They said when they visited they liked to review the daily staffing levels. On 9/28/23 at approximately 12:45 PM, a review of the book in the front lobby that contained the daily staffing numbers was reviewed with the facility's Administrator and it was discovered the most recent daily staffing sheet was dated 9/14/23. At that time, the Administrator was asked who was supposed to ensure the staffing in the book was up to date and said the nursing department was responsible to ensure it was up to date. A review of a facility provided policy titled, Posting Direct…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to THE WELLBRIDGE GROUP — 8 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 | 5 of 5 | 3.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 3.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.5★, per CMS)
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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E2G, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 30% | since 01/25/2012 |
| SENIOR CARE EQUITES NO 17 LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 30% | since 01/25/2012 |
| PERRY, MICHAEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 5% | since 01/01/2017 |
| WRONSKI, FRANK | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 30% | since 01/25/2012 |
| FRANKLIN, CYNTHIA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 05/20/2018 |
| SANGSTER, TODD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/27/2017 |
| NEXCARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/27/2017 |
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $2.2M 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 235720. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.