Aberdeen Rehabilitation and Skilled Nursing Center
5500 Fort St, Trenton, MI 48183 · For profit - Individual · 120 certified beds · (734) 671-3500 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (68%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 improved from 1 to 3 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 | 14.7% | 10.8% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.9% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.7% | 0.8% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 9.0% | 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 | 3.9% | 3.0% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.7% | 12.0% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.9% | 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 | 12.8% | 5.1% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.4% | 20.0% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.0% | 14.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.1% | 1.1% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 15.4% | 24.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 15.0% | 11.7% | 12.0% | worse |
* 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.
Met the expected recovery: 15.0% 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 20 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 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 43% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 15.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 20.0% | 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 | 15.0% | 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 | 16.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 8.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.0% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 120 beds and averages 47.3 residents a day — about 39% occupied, or roughly 73 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.42 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.30 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.08 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 3.17 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.53 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.32 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 68% is well above 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.
36 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-09 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to 2794609. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide proper transfer assistance for one resident (R106) out of three residents reviewed for falls, resulting in a fall. Findings include: A review of the clinical record for R106 documented an admission date of 1/16/26 and discharge date of 2/24/26. R106's diagnoses included congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, and morbid obesity. A Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] documented moderate cognitive impairment and dependence upon staff for transfer assistance. Additional record review documented in part the following progress notes, orders, and care plans: 1. 2/18/26 at 1:36 PM nursing progress note: Resident stated (they) slid to the floor from (their) wheelchair onto (their) back, mild pain noted. Assessed and no injury noted. Witnessed. 2. 2/18/26 at 2:29 PM nursing progress note: Resident c/o (complained of) low back pain r/t…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-09-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to: 1. Properly date-label food in the walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer; 2. Adequately clean surfaces in the kitchen; 3. Consistently ensure the dish machine was operating properly; and 4. Maintain cleanable wall surfaces near the dish machine. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all the residents who consumed from the kitchen resulting in the potential for food-borne illness. Findings include: During tours of the kitchen beginning on 9/9/25 at 8:30 AM with Dietary Manager (DM) G the following was observed: Inside the walk-in cooler a plastic container of feta cheese was dated 8/9/25. DM G stated the opened cheese should be thrown out in seven days. There was an open and undated bag of cinnamon raisin bread. Inside of the walk-in freezer the following items were opened and undated: a bag containing four individual size cheese pizzas and a bag of sausage patties. The stove drip tray was soiled with dried and burnt food debris. DM G said the drip tray was supposed to be cleaned on Sunday. DM G…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-09-11 · tag F0839 — widespreadEmploy staff that are licensed, certified, or registered in accordance with state laws.
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 proper use of the legally protected professional designation of Registered Dietitian. Findings include:On 9/9/25 at 3:00 PM, the facility provided survey prep book was examined and revealed that dietitian H was listed as the Registered Dietitian (RD) that worked at the facility. However, the RD credentials available in the survey prep book were for RD J. On 9/9/25 beginning at 3:49 PM the Regional Director of Operations (RDO) D was interviewed about dietitian H. RDO D acknowledged that dietitian H was not a Registered Dietitian, but RD J, who worked at another building, was a Registered Dietitian and supervised dietitian H. RDO D added that RD J does not have to be physically in the building and It has never been a problem before. On 9/9/25 at 4:05 PM during an interview, Human Resources (HR) K said that dietitian H completed a Coordinated Undergraduate Program at a local university September 2018 but had not obtained Registered Dietitian status. HR K stated, 100% I would know if she obtained a RD status. On 9/10/25…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-09-11 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespreadKeep all essential equipment working safely.
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 consistent proper working order of the walk-in freezer and that the drain line from the commercial ice machine was protected against contamination from sewage or other sources of contamination. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all residents that eat from the kitchen. Findings include:During the initial tour of the kitchen on 9/9/25 at 8:30 AM with Dietary Manager (DM) G the following was observed:- The internal temperature of the walk-in freezer was 11 F (Fahrenheit). The temperature documented on the freezer temperature log, obtained earlier in the day, was 5 F. A four-ounce cup of ice-cream stored in the freezer was observed soft, not frozen solid. DM G said the temperature in the freezer should be zero or below. DM G added that there was a leak in the freon line, and they have been refilling it.- The drain line from the commercial ice machine was observed to not have an airgap (an unobstructed vertical space between the end of the ice machine drain line and the flood rim 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 · D2025-09-11 · tag F0640 — isolatedEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
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 transmit Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for three (R15, R17, and R29) of six residents reviewed for resident assessments in a timely manner. Findings include: On 9/10/25 at 3:05 P.M. Registered Nurse (RN)/ MDS Coordinator M, was queried regarding the MDS submissions to CMS. RN M said that she completes the MDS assessments and then puts them in a 'batch' to be sent to MDS. RN M said that she has to obtain a code from the Corporate Director of Operations, RN D. RN M said the following resident's MDS assessments are completed but in batched status and had not been sent or accepted by CMS at this time. We usually send them all at the same time to CMS. Usually twice a month. 1. R15's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] was in 'batch status', due for submission on 8/21/25 but had not been submitted. 2. R17's quarterly MDS was dated 8/9/25 was in 'batch status', due for submission on 8/23/25 but had not been submitted. 3. R29's quarterly MDS was dated…
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 · D2025-09-11 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow the standard of practice for transcribing physician's orders for one (R47) of seven residents reviewed for medication administration resulting in R47 missing nine doses of a multivitamin. Findings include:During observation of medication administration for R47 on 9/10/25 at 8:37 AM with Registered Nurse (RN) C, R47 did not receive a Multi-Vitamin (MVI) with minerals. According to R47's Electronic Health Record (EHR) the physician ordered MVI with minerals once a day on 8/18/25. A review of the R47's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for 9/2025 revealed the order for 'MVI with minerals once a day', did not get transcribed on the September 2025 MAR. On 9/10/25 at 9:56 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) reviewed R47's EHR and confirmed that R47 and was supposed to get MVI w minerals once a day as of 8/18/25. The DON said the resident had not received the MVI with minerals since 8/31/25 because that order (MVI with minerals once a day) did not get transcribed onto 9/2025 MAR. The DON said 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 · Dcited before2025-09-11 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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 have a medication error rate below 5%.During the medication administration task three errors were observed from 28 opportunities and subsequently a 10.4% medication error rate. #1. On 9/10/25 at 9:19 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) C was observed to administer R28 medications at the bedside. RN C proceeded to sign out all the medications that were administered. R28 did not receive Ozempic 2 milligram (mg)/3 milliliter (ml)give 0.5 ml subcutaneous injection. Upon inquiry RN C confirmed all the resident's medications were given. R28's Medication Administration Record (MAR) was reviewed with RN C, and they were asked about the Ozempic prescription. RN C said, Oh, was that supposed to be given today? Yes, I should have given that. Its every Wednesday. Today is Wednesday. According to R28's Electronic Health Record (EHR) on 3/5/25 the physician prescribed Ozempic (2mg/3 ml) administer 0.5 ml subcutaneous once a day on Wednesdays. R28's MAR accurately documented the physician's order for the Ozempic every Wednesday.#2. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-17 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to MI001221903.Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a call button was within reach for one resident (R110) out of four residents reviewed for call light access.Findings include: It was reported to the State Agency that residents' call lights were placed out of reach.On 7/16/25 at 3:05 PM, R101 was observed sitting in her wheelchair in her room. R101 was heard calling for help. R101 stated, I'm hurting, and I need to get in bed.On 7/16/25 at 3:06 PM, Activity Aide (AA) H entered R101's room and stated, (R101) likes to lay down. R101's call button was positioned approximately three feet from where R101 was sitting in her wheelchair. AA H said that R101 was not able to reach her call light.On 7/16/25 at 3:40 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) joined the Surveyor in R101's room. R101 was observed sitting in her wheelchair but no longer stated she was in pain and needed to get in bed. The call light remained approximately three feet from where…
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 · D2025-07-17 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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
This citation pertains to MI1221903.Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Unit 300 shower room was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner, resulting in the residents' environment not being homelike and the potential for spread harmful pathogens. Findings include:It was reported to the State Agency that the facility was not maintained clean and sanitary.On 7/16/25 at 2:54 PM, observations of two shower stalls located in a Unit 300 shower room were made with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) G. A wet, used face cloth and gloves were on the floor of the shower stall typically used with a shower chair. On the floor of the shower stall typically used with a shower gurney was a used patient gown and two wet used face cloths. CNA G said she was at the end of her shift and neglected to clean the shower. CNA G said the shower rooms should not have been left that way.On 7/17/25 at 11:53 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) said approximately 18 residents use the shower room on Unit 300. The DON said staff were supposed to clean the shower room after…
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 before2024-08-29 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 obtain and address Medication Regimen Review (MRR) recommendations timely for two residents (R3 and R12) of five residents reviewed for medication regimen review, resulting in the potential for the continuance of unnecessary medications and lack of communication of recommended medication changes between pharmacist and physician. Findings include: R12: On 8/24/24 at 11:14 a.m. review of the clinical record documented R12 was admitted into the facility on 8/17/22 with diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus, type 2, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, congestive heart failure, dementia, and asthma. According to the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], R12 had moderate cognitive impairment and dependent for most activities of daily living. Review of R12's physician orders documented the resident's current medications as follows: - Basaglar Kwik Pen U-100 Insulin (insulin glargine) 100 unit/mL (3 mL) inject 33 units subcutaneous daily. Start…
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 26 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for two (R3 and R12) of 15 residents reviewed for medical records, resulting in resident's pharmacy recommendations being unclear and not maintained in the resident's Electronic Health Record (EHR) with the potential for miscommunication of pharmacy recommendations, physician's orders, and an unclear picture of the resident's health care status. Findings include: R3: According to R3's Electronic Health Record (EHR) the resident admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses that included Intellectual Disabilities and altered Mental Status. The Pharmacist's Drug Reviews dated 5/6/24 and 7/2/24 indicated there were pharmacy recommendations and documented; Please take the following action described below. There was no further documentation to describe the recommendation of action from the Pharmacist. On 8/28/24 at approximately 1:00 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) was asked where the Pharmacist's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to practice proper infection control techniques for one (R4) of one resident reviewed with enhanced barrier precautions, resulting in the potential for widespread infection. Findings include: 08/28/24 at 2:15 PM, R4 was observed to be returned to bed for brief changed and wound care. Registered Nurse, (RN) O and Certified Nursing Assistant, (CNA) S were observed to perform care on R4 without wearing a gown. Review of R4 Electronic Medical Record, (EMR) noted an admission date to the facility on 2/16/24 with a pertinent diagnosis of Stage II to buttocks. R4's Brief Interview of Mental Status, (BIMS) score was 14/15 (intact cognition). 08/28/24 at 2:25 PM, RN O was interviewed and acknowledged staff should have been wearing a gown. Unit Manager, UM R was interviewed and added there was a sign on the door and the staff should have been wearing a gown when performing change of brief as well as wound care.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-11 · 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 MI00138801. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to seek timely medical evaluation of an injury of unknown origin for one resident (R102), out of three residents reviewed for falls, resulting in the potential for delay in the provision of resident care needs. Findings include: The State Agency received a complaint that the resident fell, and the facility failed to seek timely medical evaluation and treatment. A review of Resident #102's (R102) clinical record documented an admission date of 1/18/2020. R102's diagnoses included Alzheimer's Disease, Atrial Fibrillation, and Diabetes Mellitus-Type 2. A Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] documented severe cognitive impairment. A review of R102's care plans documented resident was at risk for falls due to muscle weakness and diagnosis of dementia with a start date of 7/20/2023. A review of nursing notes documented the following: - Date/time: 8/3/2023 at 4:48 AM: Resident was pleasant and cooperative 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-09 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
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 promptly make good faith attempts to resolve grievances for members of the Resident Council resulting in the potential for frustration and unmet care needs. Findings include: During a Resident Council meeting on 08/08/23 at 1:35 PM, six of six residents reported they did not know how to file a grievance or that it was an option to file a grievance. Resident Council participants reported communication in the building was poor. They reported if a concern was voiced, it was not addressed. Five of the six residents responded when asked about staffing and call light response time. Four of the five residents who participated in the discussion expressed concerns with staffing and extended call light response times. The Resident Council participants reported waiting up to one hour for staff to respond to their call lights. They reported staff seemed rushed and did not have time to stop and ask if the residents needed anything. One participant expressed there had been an ongoing concern with not receiving restorative…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 Resident #16 (R16) According to the clinical record, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] Resident 16 (R16) was an [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included heart peripheral vascular disease and diabetes. Review of MDS reflected R16 scored 13 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status. Further review of the medical record including the monthly Physician orders reflected R16 was started on an anti-anxiety medication on as as needed basis on April 28, 2023 with no stop date. Review of R16's care plan dated 7/13/23 reflected R16's problem for the care plan was a diagnosis of anxiety with a goal of stabilize/improve mood and approaches were 1. appropriate referrals 2. encourage activities of interest. 3 explain all procedures of care calmly. 4. identify possible stressors to resident that need to be eliminated . 5. maintain medications as ordered. 6. Offer support and encouragement as needed. On 08/08/23 at 09:06 AM, during an interview 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-09 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to Intakes MI00132462 and MI00135054. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed maintain sufficient staff for one (Resident #2) and Resident Council, resulting in extended call light response times and the potential for unmet care needs. Findings include: Review of the Resident Council minutes revealed on 2/21/21, 5/30/23, and 6/27/23, the Resident Council expressed concerns with call light response times. During a Resident Council meeting on 08/08/23 at 1:35 PM, five of the six residents responded when asked about staffing and call light response time. Four of the five residents who participated in the discussion expressed concerns with staffing and extended call light response times. The Resident Council participants reported waiting up to one hour for staff to respond to their call lights. They reported staff seemed rushed and did not have time to stop and ask if the residents needed anything. Resident #2 (R2) Review of the medical record revealed R2…
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 before2023-08-09 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the physician received, reviewed and acted upon identified medication regimen irregularities for four residents (Resident #9, 16, 17, and 35) of five reviewed for unnecessary medications, resulting in the potential for unnecessary medications and adverse reactions. Resident #16 (R16) According to the clinical record, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] Resident 16 (R16) was an [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included heart peripheral vascular disease and diabetes. Review of MDS reflected R16 scored 13 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status. Further review of the medical record including the Pharmacy reviews and revealed the Pharmacist had found irregularities and had made recommendations for the Physician on 5/07/23, 06/01/23 and 07/05/23 . Resident #17 (R17) According to the clinical record, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] Resident 17 (R17) was an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to dispose of expired medications in one of two medication carts and two of two medication rooms reviewed, resulting in the potential for decreased medication efficacy and adverse side effects in a current facility census of 34 residents. Findings include: On 8/8/23 at 8:49 AM, Station 3 Medication Room was reviewed in the presence of Director of Nursing (DON) B. During the review, it was noted that the medication refrigerator within the medication room contained a Tuberculin Purified Protein Derivative box with a handwritten open date of 7/6/23. An open, undated Tuberculin vial was noted within the box. DON B confirmed the 7/6/23 open date indicated on the box, stated that Tuberculin was good for thirty days after opening, and therefore would have expired on 8/5/23 and would be disposed of immediately. Station 1 Medication Room was reviewed, also in the presence of DON B, immediately following Station 3 review with a second Tuberculin Purified Protein Derivative box with a handwritten open date of 7/6/23 and an open, undated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-09 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate completion of advance directive information for 3 (Resident #23, #27, and #35) of 4 residents reviewed for advance directives (legal documents that allow a person to identify decisions about end-of-life care ahead of time), resulting in the potential for a resident's preferences for medical care to not be followed by the facility. Findings include: Resident #27 Review of the medical record revealed that Resident #27 (R27) was admitted to the facility 11/21/2017 with diagnoses including major depressive disorder, pain, and difficulty in walking. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 5/13/23 revealed that R27 had clear speech, was understood by others, and was able to understand others. Section C of the same MDS revealed that R27 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) score of 12 (moderately impaired cognition). In an observation and interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-09 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 #MI00135054 Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to develop and operationalize an abuse policy consistent with regulations for three (Resident #'s 1, 9 and 23) of five reviewed, resulting in allegations of abuse to go unreported to the State Agency, not thoroughly investigated and the potential for further abuse allegations not be reported. Findings include: Resident #9 According to the clinical record, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] reflected Resident 9 (R9) was a [AGE] year old male admitted [DATE] with diagnosis that included Parkinson's disease and depression. Further review of the MDS reflected R9 scored 14 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status. On 08/09/23 at 09:00 AM, R 9 was interviewed in his room, R 9 was observed sitting in his recliner. R9 was engaging and articulate when queried about former facility employee Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) D, R9 winced and made a grimaced facial…
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 · D2023-08-09 · 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 This Citation Pertains To Intake #MI00135054 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to report allegations of abuse for three (Resident #1, #9 and #23) of 5 reviewed, resulting in allegations of abuse that were not reported to the State Agency and the potential for further allegations of abuse to go unreported. Findings include: Resident #9 According to the clinical record, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] reflected Resident 9 (R9) was a [AGE] year old male admitted [DATE] with diagnosis that included Parkinson's disease and depression. Further review of the MDS reflected R9 scored 14 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status. On 08/09/23 at 09:00 AM, R 9 was interviewed in his room, R 9 was observed sitting in his recliner. R9 was engaging and articulate when queried about former facility employee Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) D, R9 winced and made a grimaced facial expression. R9 further reported LPN D was not very nice, he had 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 · D2023-08-09 · 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 This Citation Pertains To Intake #MI000135054 Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the protection of residents and thoroughly investigate allegations of abuse for one (Resident #9) of 5 reviewed for abuse, resulting in the potential for further abuse to occur and allegations of abuse not being thoroughly investigated. Resident #9 According to the clinical record, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] reflected Resident 9 (R9) was a [AGE] year old male admitted [DATE] with diagnosis that included Parkinson's disease and depression. Further review of the MDS reflected R9 scored 14 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status. On 08/09/23 at 09:00 AM, R9 was interviewed in his room, R9 was observed sitting in his recliner. R9 was engaging and articulate when queried about former facility employee Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) D, R9 winced and made a grimaced facial expression. R9 further reported LPN D was not very nice, he had 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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the resident and/or resident's representative a written reason of transfer to a hospital for 2 (Resident #9 and #23) of 2 residents reviewed for transfer/discharge, resulting in the potential of residents and/or family being un-informed of the reason for transfer. Findings include: Resident #9 Review of the medical record reflected that Resident #9 (R9) was readmitted to facility 4/28/23 with diagnoses including syncope and collapse, muscle weakness, Parkinson's Disease, and pulmonary fibrosis. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) Of 6/7/23 reflected that R9 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) score of 14 (cognitively intact). Review of the Discharge MDS dated [DATE] reflected that R9 had an unplanned discharge to an acute care hospital and that his return to the facility was anticipated. In an observation and interview on 8/07/23 at 10:10 AM, R9 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-09 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or resident's representative of the facility's policy for bed hold for two (Resident #9 and Resident #26) of two reviewed resulting in the potential of residents and/or representatives to be uninformed of the bed hold policy. Findings include: Resident #26 (R26) Review of the medical record revealed R26 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included muscle weakness, cellulitis, protein-calorie malnutrition, convulsions, anxiety, pressure ulcer, hypotension, diabetes, and seizures. Review of the progress note dated 7/4/23 revealed R26 was transferred to the hospital for a blood transfusion. There was no documentation that a bed hold policy was provided upon transfer. In an interview on 08/08/23 at 11:20 AM, Director of Nursing (DON) B reported R26 did not receive a bed hold notice because the transfer was an emergency. Resident #9 (R9) Review of the medical record reflected that Resident #9 (R9) 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-09 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed complete a comprehensive assessment for one (Resident #139) of 12 reviewed, resulting in the potential for unmet care needs. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #139 (R139) admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, hypertension, diabetes, Parkinson's Disease, stage 4 pressure ulcer, and osteomyelitis of vertebra sacral and sacrococcygeal region. On 8/8/23 at 7:25 AM, R139 was observed asleep in bed with a wound vac in place. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/30/23 revealed the MDS was in process, incomplete, and not submitted. R139 did not have a completed MDS assessment since admission. In a telephone interview on 8/8/23 at 3:27 PM, MDS Coordinator M reported she had completely missed R139's comprehensive admission MDS. MDS Coordinator M reported R139's MDS was due by 5/6/23.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-09 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 revise the care plan for one residents (#23) of 12 residents reviewed for care plan timing and revision resulting in the potential for residents that use language other than English to have unmet care needs. Findings included: Resident #23 (R23) Review of the medical record revealed R23 was admitted to the facility 08/21/2016 with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, muscle weakness, dementia, psychotic disturbances, mood disturbance, anxiety, disc degeneration of the lumbar region, pain, spondylosis (wear and tear of spinal disk) of cervical region, insomnia, hyperkalemia (high potassium), osteoarthritis, and constipation. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/16/2023, revealed R23 Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) was dashed out because resident cognition could not be assessed. During observation and attempted interview on 08/07/2023 at 10:08 a.m. R23 was observed lying in bed. R23 did not respond to verbal questions. During a telephone interview…
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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide interpretive services for one resident (#23) of one resident reviewed for language resulting in the potential for resident that use language other than English to have unmet care needs. Findings Included: Resident #23 (R23) Review of the medical record revealed R23 was admitted to the facility 08/21/2016 with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, muscle weakness, dementia, psychotic disturbances, mood disturbance, anxiety, disc degeneration of the lumbar region, pain, spondylosis (wear and tear of spinal disk) of cervical region, insomnia, hyperkalemia (high potassium), osteoarthritis, and constipation. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/16/2023, revealed R23 Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) was dashed out because resident cognition could not be assessed. During observation and attempted interview on 08/07/2023 at 10:08 a.m. R23 was observed lying in bed. R23 did not respond to verbal questions. During a telephone interview on 08/07/2023…
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 · D2023-08-09 · 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 This citation pertains to Intakes MI00134426 and MI00136854. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) for three (Resident #139, #188, #238) of four reviewed, resulting in unmet care needs and the potential for a decline in emotional and physical health. Findings include: Resident #139 (R139) Review of the medical record revealed Resident #139 (R139) admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, hypertension, diabetes, Parkinson's Disease, stage 4 pressure ulcer, and osteomyelitis of vertebra sacral and sacrococcygeal region. R139 did not have a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed since admission. Review of the Physician's Order dated 4/24/23 revealed EATING: Feeding assistance. The Physician's Order dated 4/25/23 revealed Diet Order: Regular, thin liquids as tolerated; provide feeding assistance with meals. Review of the Nutritional assessment dated [DATE] revealed Requires feeding…
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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Resident #11 According to the clinical record including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] , Resident 11 (R11) was a [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility with multiple medical issues including a diagnoses of traumatic brain injury. Review of the MDS reflected R11 scored 12 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental (BIMS). Section G of the MDS reflected R11 required extensive assistance from two staff persons for bed mobility and transfers, for dressing and eating R11 coded as requiring extensive assistance from one staff person. Section G 0400 of the MDS reflected upper extremity impairment and bilateral impairment for lower extremity. Review of R11's Physician order dated 04/05/23 reflected Restorative (3x/wk ) [3 times a week] AROM (active range of motion) exes (exercises) of BUE/BLE (bilateral upper and lower extremities) 10 reps x 1 set. Gentle stretch of BIL (bilateral) hamstrings, as tolerated. Review of the Restorative Nursing Care Plan dated 4/05/23 revealed R11 was to have restorative…
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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a therapeutic diet that considers the residents clinical conditional condition for one resident (#189) of three residents reviewed for proper diet requirements resulting in the potential of clinical complications for those residents with a clinical condition. Findings Included: Resident #189 (R189) Review of the medical record revealed R189 was admitted to the facility 07/13/2023 with diagnoses that included diabetes, hypertension, end stage renal disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), muscle weakness, epistaxis, diarrhea, kidney transplant, asthma, constipation, arthritis, angina pectoris, atherosclerotic heart disease, breast cancer, hypothyroidism, hypertension, bipolar disorder, and kidney failure. During observation and interview on 08/08/2023 at 07:39 R189 was observed standing in the doorway of her room. Resident appeared well groomed. R189 explained that she received hemodialysis three times per week and demonstrated a dressing on her left arm that covered her dialysis port.…
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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to assure safe and appropriate use of bed rail assist bars for one resident (#23) of one resident reviewed for bed safety resulting in the potential for entrapment, injury, or death. Findings Included: Resident #23 (R23) Review of the medical record revealed R23 was admitted to the facility 08/21/2016 with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, muscle weakness, dementia, psychotic disturbances, mood disturbance, anxiety, disc degeneration of the lumbar region, pain, spondylosis (wear and tear of spinal disk) of cervical region, insomnia, hyperkalemia (high potassium), osteoarthritis, and constipation. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/16/2023, revealed R23 Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) was dashed out because resident cognition could not be assessed. During observation and attempted interview on 08/07/2023 at 10:08 a.m. R23 was observed lying in bed. R23 did not respond to verbal questions. R23's left side of the bed was pushed up against the wall…
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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 as needed psychotopic medication was not prescribed for longer than 14 days for one resident (#16) of 5 reviewed for unnecessary medications, resulting in the potential for unnecessary psychotropic medications and adverse reactions. According to the clinical record, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] Resident 16 (R16) was an [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included heart peripheral vascular disease and diabetes. Review of MDS reflected R16 scored 13 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status. Review of monthly Physician orders reflected an anti-anxiety medication was ordered on 4/28/23 on an as needed basis, the Physician order did not have a stop date. On 08/08/23 at 09:06 AM, during an interview with Social Worker/Activity Director C, she reported she worked with the psychiatric group that comes to the facility and Nursing staff. When further questioned about stop…
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 before2023-08-09 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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 of less than five percent when two medication errors were observed from a total of twenty-eight opportunities for two residents (Resident #16 and #17) of five reviewed for medication administration, resulting in a medication error rate of 7.14% and the potential for reduced efficacy of medications and increased risk of adverse reactions/side effects. Findings include: Resident #17 (R17) Review of the medical record revealed that Resident #17 (R17) was readmitted to facility on 6/16/23 with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 6/20/23 revealed that R17 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) score of 13 (cognitively intact). Section N, of the same MDS, revealed that R17 had received insulin injections on 3 of the days since her 6/16/23 facility readmission. Further review of R17's medical record revealed an order dated 6/21/23 for Novolog FlexPen Insulin four times…
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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to administer pneumococcal immunizations in accordance with the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations for two residents (#1, #23) of five residents reviewed resulting in the potential for server illness and complications from pneumococcal disease Findings Included: Resident #1 (R1) Review of the medical record revealed R1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included muscle weakness, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, osteoarthritis, insomnia, anxiety, and pseudobulbar affect. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 7/9/23 revealed R1 scored 6 out of 15 (severe cognitive impairment) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS). Review of R1's medical record demonstrated that she had received pneumococcal vaccination, PCV13, on 10/11/2017. No documentation of PCV20 or PPS23 vaccinations were offered or provided to resident R1. According to CDC (Center for Disease Control 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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — isolatedRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
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 monitoring and inspection of resident bed frames and mattress for one resident (#23) of one resident reviewed for bed safety resulting in the potential for entrapment, injury, or death. Findings Included: Resident #23 (R23) Review of the medical record revealed R23 was admitted to the facility 08/21/2016 with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, muscle weakness, dementia, psychotic disturbances, mood disturbance, anxiety, disc degeneration of the lumbar region, pain, spondylosis (wear and tear of spinal disk) of cervical region, insomnia, hyperkalemia (high potassium), osteoarthritis, and constipation. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/16/2023, revealed R23 Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) was dashed out because resident cognition could not be assessed. During observation and attempted interview on 08/07/2023 at 10:08 a.m. R23 was observed lying in bed. R23 did not respond to verbal questions. R23's left side of the bed was pushed up…
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 · C2023-08-09 · tag F0577 — widespreadAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
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 information within the Survey Book was up to date and maintained to include reports of retrospective surveys and facility plan of correction for identified deficiencies and failed to inform/educate six of six resident who attended the Confidential Group Meeting resulting in the potential for residents, visitors, and families to be uninformed of the facilities deficient practices in a current facility census of 34 residents. Findings Included: During facility tour on 08/09/2023 at 07:11 a.m. the facility Survey Book was located steal hanger by the first nurses' station when entering the facility. Review of the Survey Book demonstrated surveys with exit dates of 7/31/2022, 8/8/2022, 2/5/2021, 9/17/2019, and 9/23/2019. The facility had received an abbreviated survey with and exit date of 11/16/2022. The survey with an exit date of 11/16/2022 was not present in the Survey Book. In an interview on 08/09/2023 at 10:11 a.m. Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A confirmed that the survey with an exit date 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.
“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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NASIR, SHAHIDA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | 50% | since 07/01/2008 |
| NASIR, IQBAL | Individual | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2008 |
| DUGGAN, DENNIS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| SUDHAKARA, AVIKSHITHA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/25/2025 |
| TERRY, MICHELLE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 08/10/2011 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 $666K 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. 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
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 235052. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-11, 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.