No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

South Lyon Senior Care and Rehab Center

700 Reynolds Sweet Parkway, South Lyon, MI 48178 · For profit - Corporation · 74 certified beds · (248) 437-2048 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (248) 437-2048 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Dec 20233 actual-harm citations
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 3 actual-harm citations
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
22316 Pontiac Trl · (248) 437-0086 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
22421 Pontiac Trl · (248) 437-8131 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
22385 Pontiac Trl · (248) 446-8812 · Call to confirm hours
Park
21620 N Dixboro Rd · (248) 437-1735 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
54899 8 Mile Rd · (248) 325-4407

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 4 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased16.5%10.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.6%5.4%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.9%1.5%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.5%4.3%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.6%3.0%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened6.9%12.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication22.8%19.4%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.2%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.9%5.1%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control5.5%20.0%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table5.5%14.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.8%1.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine69.6%79.5%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission30.3%24.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.5%11.7%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.601.841.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.681.641.80typical

§ 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.

64.7% 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 195 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

64.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
62.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.45U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.20hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 62.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 70 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 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 43% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF64.7%CMS range 57.3–71.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.4%CMS range 7.1–13.710.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge62.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge67.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge52.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting98.7%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 dischargenot 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 stay1.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.0%CMS range 3.9–11.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.851.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.79
RN hours/ resident / day
0.60
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.23
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.61
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.61
RN hoursweekends
36.0%
Total nursing turnover
14.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 74 beds and averages 68.5 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 6 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 3.61 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.79 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.23 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 3.07 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.86 to 0.61 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-15)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-20)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · Gcited beforedisputed · IDR2026-06-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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. 3032954Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to safeguard an appropriately sized wheelchair cushion for one (R702) of two residents reviewed for accidents resulting in R702 falling to the floor, that required hospitalization for treatment of a large laceration requiring 24 sutures and pain. Findings include.Clinical record review revealed R702 was admitted on [DATE]. R702 had Activity of Daily Living (ADL) deficits related to peripheral vascular disease, history of falls related stroke with left sided weakness, vertebral stenosis and vertebral bone spurs. According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], R702 required transfer with one-person assist and utilized a wheelchair. The Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) indicated R702 had no cognitive impairment.A record review of the care plans revealed no documentation of R702's use of a wheelchair cushion and no updates following the fall. The State Agency received an allegation…

    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
  • Actual harm · G2025-09-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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

    This citation pertains to Complaint #2610789.Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to adequately assess, monitor, and treat in a timely manner a resident's change in condition for one (R801) of one resident reviewed for change in condition, resulting in family calling 911 and the resident requiring treatment for hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) with a blood glucose level of 24 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dl). Findings include:A review of a complaint submitted to the State Agency revealed the complainant received a call from R801 on 9/8/25 at approximately 6:00 AM and the resident's speech was slurred, and the complainant could not understand him. The complainant contacted 911 because they were concerned R801 could be having a stroke. When the complainant provided the resident's name to the 911 operator, the operator told them R801 had been calling 911 since 3:00 AM for help and when an officer arrived at the facility, they were told by the staff R801 was fine. The complainant further noted that around 3:00 AM, they talked to a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) at…

    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
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-01-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 #MI00140638 This citation has two deficient practices. Deficient practice #1 Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to consistently monitor and ensure appropriate interventions were in place for one (R171), a severely cognitively impaired resident with a history of falls and wandering, out of four residents reviewed for abuse/accidents, resulting in multiple falls leading to a hip fracture, skin tears requiring sutures, bruising, pain and hospitalizations. Findings include: On 1/22/24 at approximately 1:09 PM, R171 was observed in their room in bed. The resident had gauze wrapped around their left wrist and lower arm. The resident was alert. When asked questions regarding the gauze on their arm and possible falls in the facility, R171 was not able to provide any specific responses and appeared extremely confused as to their present location. Review of R171's clinical record revealed the resident was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], had…

    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 · F2026-04-15 · 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 maintain the kitchen in a sanitary manner resulting in the potential to spread foodborne illness to all residents that consume food from the kitchen.Findings Include: On 04/13/2026 9:31 a.m., the initial tour of the kitchen was conducted with Dietary Director L (DD L) and the following areas of concern were observed:A buildup of scaling was observed on both sides of the ice machine in the upper hinge area.A build-up of food debris was observed on multiple ready to use plastic bins. According to the 2022 FDA Food Code section 4-601.11 Equipment, Food-Contact Surfaces, Nonfood-Contact Surfaces, and Utensils. (A) EQUIPMENT FOOD-CONTACT SURFACES and UTENSILS shall be clean to sight and touch. A drainpipe that connected a rinse sink and the high temp dish washing machine was observed to be without an air gap providing a space for backflow/overflow.According to the 2022 FDA Food Code section 5-402.11 Backflow Prevention. (A) Except as specified in (B), (C), and (D) of this section, a direct connection may not exist…

    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 · Dcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to prevent avoidable falls for one resident (R43) of one resident reviewed for falls, resulting in three avoidable falls. Findings include: On 4/13/26 at 9:22 AM, R43 was observed lying in their bed. The bed was in the lowest position with left side of the bed against the wall and a fall mat on the floor to the right side of the bed. On 4/14/2026 at 11:36 AM, a review of R43's facility provided Incident/Accident (I/A) reports were reviewed and revealed the following:An I/A for a fall on 10/10/25 that read, .Nursing Description: This writer was entering (room #) to check VS (vital signs) of the roommate, and writer observed (R43) sitting on the ground on his floor mat next to his bed with his CNA (Certified Nurse Aide) standing beside him. I asked what happened and CNA explained that after assisting resident to the edge of the bed to transfer to WC (wheelchair) he (the CNA) stepped away from the resident's side to grab the WC next to the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-15 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
    Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
    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 laboratory diagnostics (labs) were completed for one resident (R19) of two residents reviewed for diagnostics.Findings include:On 4/14/26 the medical record for R19 was reviewed and revealed the following: R19 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including Type two diabetes mellitus, Hyperlipidemia and Acute cholecystitis.A Physician order dated 3/26/26 revealed the following: cbc (complete blood count) with diff (differential), cmp (comprehensive metabolic panel), hgba1c (hemoglobin A1C) on 2/27/26 <sic>A second Physician order dated 12/20/25 revealed the following: cbc with diff, cmp on monday 12/22/25A Physicians' evaluation dated 3/25/2026 revealed the following: Physician's note-note text: patient seen and examined in bed .a/p (assessment/plan) cognitive decline moderate pcm (protein calorie malnutrition) alb (albumin) 2.8 dietician to follow repeat albumin h/o (history of) cholycyctites .dm-2 (type-two…

    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 · D2026-04-15 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement appropriate infection control practices during catheter site and wound site care for one resident, (R43) of one resident reviewed for catheter site and wound care, resulting in the potential for the spread of infection. Findings include: On 4/13/26 at 9:22 AM, a sign posted outside R43's room indicated they were on enhanced barrier precautions (an infection control strategy requiring an isolation gown and glove use during high-contact resident care to prevent Multidrug-Resistant Organism transmission). R43 was observed lying in bed. A urinary catheter drainage bag was clipped to the bed rail. R43 was asked about their catheter and voluntarily lifted their shirt to expose their abdomen revealing a suprapubic catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder through a small abdominal incision, rather than the urethra, to drain urine). On 4/14/26 at 11:10 AM, an observation of S/P (suprapubic) catheter site care and catheter site wound care was observed with Nurse 'I'. Nurse 'I' gathered the required supplies…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-20 · 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 On 2/18/25 at 8:55 AM, the privacy curtain between bed 118-1 and 118-2 was observed to be heavily soiled with yellow and brown stains. On 2/18/25 at 12:11 PM, an observation of the Burgundy [NAME] unit was conducted and revealed the following: The toilet in room [ROOM NUMBER] had fecal matter on the rim. The bathroom floor had sandpaper type strips adhered that were coming unpeeled from the tile. Underneath the soap dispenser was a large patch of unsanded, unpainted drywall mud. The drip tray for the soap dispenser had an accumulation of pinkish/brown liquid contained in it. The sink plumbing in room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom were exposed with a build-up of dust and cobweb debris. Visitors in the room had complaints about the exposed dirty plumbing and the heavily soiled privacy curtain. They said they didn't think the curtain had been changed in a, couple of years. The bathroom sink plumbing in room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with a large accumulation of dust and cobwebs on the pipes along with dust and stains…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-20 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a referral was made for a level II evaluation (a comprehensive evaluation completed by the local community mental health agency) for one (R49) of one residents reviewed for PASARR (Preadmission Screening/Annual Resident Review) screenings. Findings include: On 2/18/24 at approximately 12:01 PM, a review of R49's clinical record revealed the resident was initially admitted into the facility on 1/7/24 with diagnoses that included: hemiplegia and hemiparesis (weakness/paralysis) following cerebral infarction (stroke), generalized anxiety disorder and brief psychotic disorder ( according to the DSM-5/diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, this diagnosis is a sudden onset of psychotic behavior that lasts less than one month - that includes at least one the following psychotic symptoms: delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech, grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior) . A review of the resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe positioning of a resident's bed in proximity to a wall heating unit and ensure a complete and thorough investigation into the circumstances of the incident for one (R164) of four residents reviewed for accidents. Findings include: On 2/18/25 at 11:00 AM, R164 was observed laying in bed, on a bariatric sized adaptive mattress. The resident was able to participate with small, basic discussion but was unable to provide any specific details about their situation. During a brief record review, a nursing progress note on 2/12/25 at 3:16 PM read, .Writer went to assess resident's finger. Yesterday, therapy observed blister to right ring fingertip. Resident is unable to communicate with staff effectively and has limited bed mobility, leans to the right in bed. Resident was lying in bed, bed <sic> at this time was against the wall which was touching the heater. Heater caused the bed frame to become hot to touch. Residents finger was…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-20 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate less than five percent when two medication errors were observed from a total of 29 opportunities for two residents (R#'s 20 and 52) of four residents observed during medication administration, resulting in a medication error rate of 6.9%. Findings include: On 2/18/25 at 9:07 AM, Nurse 'B' was observed preparing medications for administration to R20. Upon completion of the preparation, Nurse 'B' administered the medications including one nasal spray (ipratropium) for the treatment of a runny nose associated with allergies or the common cold. At the end of the observation, Nurse 'B' confirmed all medications due at that time were given. On 2/20/25 at 9:41 AM, the medications administered to R20 were compared against their physician's orders and Medication Administration Record (MAR). At that time, it was discovered R20 had a second nasal spray (fluticascone propionate) for the treatment of allergies to be administered with their morning medications that was not observed as…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-20 · tag F0810 — isolated
    Provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the consistent use of assistive devices for eating for one resident (R59) of seven residents reviewed for dining. Findings include: On 2/18/25 at 8:57 AM, R59 was observed in their bed eating breakfast. R59 was non-verbal but appeared to appropriately answer simple yes/no questions by nodding/shaking their head. A review of their meal ticket indicated all cups should contain lids and a maroon mug with a lid was used for hot liquids. R59's tray contained a cup of juice and a cup of chocolate shake supplement without lids or straws. On 2/18/25 at 12:47 PM, R59 was in their room with a lunch tray that contained a bowl of tomato soup. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) 'L' was in the room and poured the soup into a coffee mug with no lid, saying it was easier for R59 to consume. The cup was not observed to be the maroon cup with a lid as indicated on their meal ticket. It was further observed a glass of apple juice and a cup of chocolate shake…

    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 · D2023-12-07 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to Intake(s): MI00140898 and MI00140842. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to report allegations of abuse to the State Agency (SA) for one resident (R702) out of four residents reviewed for abuse. Findings include: Complaints were filed with the SA that alleged R702 was physically abused by a staff member. A review of the R702's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted after a hospital stay on 11/7/23 with diagnoses that included: muscular dystrophy, kidney failure and type II diabetes. Review of the resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) revealed R702 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (MDS) of 14/15 (cognitively intact). Continued review of R702's clinical record documented, in part, the following: Nurses Note (5:10 PM): Resident pale .having increased lethargy/fatigue and complaining of pain to BLLE (bilateral left lower extremity) .agreed to send resident to (name redacted) Hospital. Transported by (name…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation 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.

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to NEXCARE HEALTH SYSTEMS — 20 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 53.8+0.2 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.4-0.4 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 53.8+1.2 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.4-0.4 vs chain
The other 19 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
NEXCARE HOLDINGS, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 10/31/2013
BEARDSLEY, KEVINIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/03/2015
SANGSTER, TODDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/04/2013
NEXCARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2005
PERRY, MICHAELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2015

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$8.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-0.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$901K
Related-party expense11% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 54%Medicare 14%Other / private 32%

This home reported $901K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% 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

$368per resident / day
operating cost
$11,192per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$365per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Michigan
$11,254/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$11,969/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,818/mo
Assisted living

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 235065. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-15, 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.

What to do next