Covenant Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation at Wel

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.

66.3% 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 252 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 53.0% 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 149 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 1.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 28% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 39 beds and averages 33.6 residents a day — about 86% 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 4.96 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.41 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.03 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 4.32 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.21 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.65 to 0.82 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

20 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-03-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure 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 1) Maintain food preparation and kitchen equipment in a sanitary and good working condition, and 2) Ensure that all partly used or opened foods had a use-by date, resulting in an increased likelihood for food borne illness with hospitalization, and cross contamination affecting a census of 32 residents who consumed oral nutrition from the facility kitchen. Findings Include: Review of the Public Health Service 2009 Food Code, adopted by the Michigan Food Law, effective October 1, 2012, Chapter 4-501.14 directs that equipment cleaning frequency is to be throughout the day at frequency necessary to prevent recontamination of equipment and utensils. 4-602.11 Equipment Food-Contact Surfaces and Utensils. (A) EQUIPMENT FOOD-CONTACT SURFACES and UTENSILS shall be cleaned: Review of the facility Dietary Sanitation of Equipment policy, dated 2/13/25, revealed that staff were to clean kitchen equipment daily and stated Safety always come first. Review of the facility Labeling Food Product policy, dated 1/3/2023, stated…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-03-25 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a clean and safe environment for 5 of 8 residents' room observations (resident rooms: #22, #26, #32, #34, and #40), and for 4 of 6 residents from the confidential resident group meeting which took place on 03/24/36, resulting in verbalization of frustration and anger regarding condition of resident rooms, and an increased risk for cross contamination, risking resident health and welfare. Findings Include: This citation pertains to Intake Number 2806043. Review of the facility Maintaining a Clean Environment policy, dated March 2021, stated Cleaning a resident's room both daily cleanings and upon discharge includes the following: Cleaning all horizontal surfaces, cleaning of all contact points, decontaminating the telephone, remote control, light switches and other high touch areas with a wet cloth and germicide; wet mop floors daily using a detergent germicide (bathroom floor). During the confidential Resident's Group Meeting held…

  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 · E2026-03-25 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — pattern
  Ensure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure daily snacks were offered and delivered per 6 of 6 resident complaints during a confidential resident group meeting, resulting in resident verbalizations of anger and frustration with complaints, and the failure to offer and deliver snacks to residents documented to receive evening snacks. Findings Include:Review of the facility snack policy dated February 2014, stated the snacks were to be given to resident's Between-meal (and) are offered to resident's (daily), except when contraindicated; document snack consumption.During the confidential resident group meeting held on 3/24/26 at 11:10 a.m., 6 of 6 attendees verbalized anger and frustration regarding not knowing they could even have snacks, not being offered daily snacks, and not receiving any snacks.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-25 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and records review, the facility failed to ensure that 1 resident (R #35) had ADL care done daily, and that 1 resident (R#55) had a privacy bag covering the urinary catheter bag, of 22 Residents reviewed for dignity. Findings include: Resident #55: Record review of Resident #55's admission progress note dated 3/21/2026 at 4:45PM revealed a 16 French Foley catheter with milky discharge observed at foley insertion site of penis. 03/23/2026 9:47 AM Resident seated up on side of bed working with Speech therapy person, observed a clear hard plastic urometer and urine collection catheter bag hanging at the bedside from the doorway. No privacy bag or covering noted, clear yellow urine noted in urine meter on the bag. Bag and spout touching the floor. Surveyor will continue to monitor the catheter bag placement. In an interview on 03/23/2026 at 11:25 AM with Resident #55's family member revealed that the resident was at another long-term care facility and went to the hospital 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-25 · 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 ensure that two residents (#3 and #8) of 22 residents reviewed, were fully informed, per consent, of the dosage and frequency of the psychotropic and/or antidepressant medications they were receiving.Findings include: Resident #3: Record review of Resident #3's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] admission revealed a Brief Interview of Mental status (BIMs) score of 13 out of 15, with medical diagnosis of anemia, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, gastroesophageal reflux disease, renal insufficiency, wound infection, diabetes, arthritis, malnutrition, depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Record review of Resident #3's March 2026 Medication Administration Record (MAR) and physician orders revealed an antidepressant Mirtazapine Tablet 7.5 MG orally at bedtime. The antidepressant started on 3/2/2026. Record review on 03/24/2026 at 11:20 AM of Resident #3's antidepressant Mirtazapine consent signed by the resident on 3/2/2026, see…

  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 · D2026-03-25 · tag F0627 — isolated
  Ensure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
  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 safe discharge for 1 resident (Resident #53) of 3 closed records reviewed, resulting in the potential for ineffective or mismanaged continued care, an Adult Protective Services referral or safe placement and a facility discharge summary review. Findings include:Resident #53:Record review of Resident #53's hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed a medical diagnosis of dementia along with other chronic diseases of: chronic cellulitis of legs, chronic wounds, acute kidney injury, chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction of 45-50%, aortic stenosis, atrial fibrillation, heart block with pacemaker, history of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and was discharged to long-term care facility. Record review of Resident #53's nursing progress notes revealed an admission on [DATE] at 1:54PM a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMs) was performed on the resident with a score of 6 out of 15, severe cognitive impairment. 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop 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 This citation pertains to Intake Number 2806043. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that 3 residents' care plans (#16, #55 and #56) of 22 residents' care plans reviewed were up to date with resident specific interventions, resulting in the high risk for improper or non-specific nursing interventions with poor continuity of care. Findings Include: Resident #16: Review of the Face Sheet, Diagnosis Sheet, nursing notes dated 3/26, and care plans dated 2/25/26 and 3/10/26, revealed Resident #16 was 88 years-old, alert and able to make own healthcare decisions, required staff assistance with all Activities of Daily Living (ADL's), and was non-weight bearing. The residents diagnosis revealed, sepsis, fall with fracture of right fibula (leg bone), fracture of right ankle, and facility acquired pressure ulcer (PU) on right foot. Review of the residents facility physician orders dated 3/10/26, stated Air Cast with tube sock when out of bed, Cleanse Right foot inner bunion…

  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 · Dcited before2026-03-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide 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 records review the facility failed to prevent facility-acquired skin injuries for 1 resident (Resident #56) of 22 residents reviewed, resulting in the development of bilateral heel redness with the verbalization for pain and discomfort and likelihood of prolonged illness. Findings include: Resident #56:Record review of Resident #56's admission assessment dated [DATE] skin integrity section noted two open areas with dressings to the left knee and scattered bruising. Observation and interview on 03/23/2026 at 9:29 AM with Resident #56 were observed with her heels resting on the footboard of the bed and the Resident stated that both her heels hurt and that's what woke her up today and she told a nurse and they put some cream on them. Observed at this time with both heels resting on the footboards and the head of the bed elevated high up and the resident's position as scrunched down to the end of the bed, while eating breakfast. Resident stated that She also has a sore on her tail…

  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 · D2026-03-25 · tag F0848 — isolated
  Provide a neutral and fair arbitration process and agree to arbitrator and venue.
  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 that a venue that was convenient to both parties was clearly identified in the arbitration agreements for 2 residents (Resident #14 and Resident #43) of 2 residents reviewed, resulting in the likelihood for unresolved arbitration disputes. Findings include: An interview and record review on 03/24/2026 at 12:59 PM with Registered Nurse (RN) P revealed the facility had 2 residents in a binding arbitration agreement. RN P stated that she did not know if anyone has used the arbitration to resolve disputes she is to only get the signatures and not prevue to corporate legal information. RN P stated that she goes over the form and reads the agreement to them and ask if they know what that means and explains that she was not a lawyer so does not give legal advice and do not let them to sign or not sign. RN P stated that she explains to residents that the facility use a third-party mediator for legal disputes, there is a right to cancel agreement section that they cancel the arbitration or change it. Record 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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  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 This citation pertains to Intake Number 2806043. Based on observations, interview and record, the facility failed to ensure proper handwashing was done during dining and medication pass observations, ensure that1 resident's (Resident #16) of 1 resident reviewed for CPAP, mask was properly stored when not in use, and ensure that 1 resident (Resident #55) of 2 residents reviewed for urinary catheter use, catheter bag was off the floor, resulting in an increased risk for cross contamination and respiratory infection, and an increased risk for contamination during meals and medication administration from lack of handwashing, with risk of resident illnesses and hospitalization. Findings Include: Resident #16: Review of the Face Sheet, Diagnosis sheet, Nursing notes dated 3/26, and care plans dated 2/25/26 and 3/10/26, revealed Resident #16 was 88 years-old, alert and able to make own healthcare decisions, required staff assistance with all Activities of Daily Living (ADL's), and non-weight bearing. The residents…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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 $184K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MI